Student Medical Center to Start Charging

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 1:22am

ireland2012 wrote: »

Well funny but I am not his mother. But i don't believe its his fault, its the university that has the ultimate power. The charges btw are not going to drive anyone into poverty.

you miss the point.

The problem isn't DD was steam rolled by the university and they made changes he had no ability to change. The problem is DD did not communicate effectively ANY Of these issues, did not REPRESENT the students and did not CONSULT the students.

Next, it seems some of the sabbatical officers didn't even have the same hymn sheet. entire thing is ridiculous

ireland2012 · 15-04-2012 1:27am

What did you expect them to do shout it from the library roof.It was in an focal, what would you have done. What is done is done just get over it. lord why to people have to complain all the time

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 1:33am

it was in an focal but after they had already decided...

what I would have done is i would have informed as many people as possible as early as possible so as many people as possible would have a long as possible to come up with an alternative solution.

people are complaining about our elected politician. as we are entitled. your two posts lack any thing positive or relevant, they're just very limp, unfounded and empty defences of derek daly. and you don't even give your name.

ireland2012 · 15-04-2012 1:47am

So what i don't have to give my name.

Nobody in the SU knew of the level of charge coming in,but it does not matter if they knew in time to give a heads up to the students, Most students dont care at all about the SU, just look at the amount of people that have ever turned up to any of the Meetings.People dont read the emails or any post from the SU.They don't take part or care about the union but expect it to be there when they want it to be, its a case of take take take and contribute nothing.

Its not a empty defence of Derek, to be fair to him you can not blame him or the SU for everything that goes wrong.

Nockz · 15-04-2012 4:31am

Ireland2012, I don't think Derek was simply told one day that the charges were coming in. He isn't a messenger boy whose purpose is to tell us what has been told to him(as much as that would help). Instead, he is there to listen to what might happen and then negotiate, as a representative of the student body, a compromise that will benefit the students. He is quite heavily involved in the decision making, as you would expect from someone you elect to make decisions on your behalf (and when the students elect you, that's a lof of people you're arguing for).

I have a great deal of respect in Derek, as I do for many people. It is very disconcerting, however, to hear how he seemingly let us down or missed the opportunity to alert the students. It feels, to me anyway, that he hasn't fought for this.

As for Derek not having known of the figures: Does this mean that he simply didn't know such figures existed (if so, why was this allowed to happen?) or does it mean An Focal were making up fluff for their headliner (if so, why was this allowed to happen?)?

Cossax · 15-04-2012 5:02am

ireland2012 wrote: »

So what i don't have to give my name.

Nobody in the SU knew of the level of charge coming in,but it does not matter if they knew in time to give a heads up to the students, Most students dont care at all about the SU, just look at the amount of people that have ever turned up to any of the Meetings.People dont read the emails or any post from the SU.They don't take part or care about the union but expect it to be there when they want it to be, its a case of take take take and contribute nothing.

Its not a empty defence of Derek, to be fair to him you can not blame him or the SU for everything that goes wrong.

Obviously someone did, they wrote an article on it a week before the news broke. It's in the "I'm Sick of TST Getting Stories Out Ahead of Us" paper.

I'd like to make it clear that I have nothing to do with TST other than occasionally reading it.

ninty9er · 15-04-2012 5:06pm

roro1neil0 wrote: »

it was in an focal but after they had already decided...

Where did anyone get the impression that I knew before that?

I tagged along to a meeting between Tara and the Director if Student Affairs last semester where the charges were one of a number of possibilities, the Director of Finance told me the same thing and that's the last I heard of it until a few weeks ago.

Why didn't the Union tell you?? There was nothing to tell. There was no developed plan, no meat on the bones, I'm not even sure there is as it stands, but in any case, this is the job of the Welfare Officer, something which I engaged with I we ye course of 2 years when I held that role.

Christ, do ye want to know what I had for breakfast?

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 5:18pm

ninty9er wrote: »

Where did anyone get the impression that I knew before that?

I tagged along to a meeting between Tara and the Director if Student Affairs last semester where the charges were one of a number of possibilities, the Director of Finance told me the same thing and that's the last I heard of it until a few weeks ago.

Why didn't the Union tell you?? There was nothing to tell. There was no developed plan, no meat on the bones, I'm not even sure there is as it stands, but in any case, this is the job of the Welfare Officer, something which I engaged with I we ye course of 2 years when I held that role.

Christ, do ye want to know what I had for breakfast?

Is this it? Your explanation for this fiasco? Nobody told you? This entire debacle is a sick joke. Adam Moursy and Cathal Ronan will have some up hill struggle trying to undo the harm DD and TF have done to this SU. DD, by his own admission, is completely uninformed on anything relevant from a welfare point of view and TF has shown, as was predicted, that she no skills to deal with any of this.

Derek blames Tara. Tara blames Derek. KOB blames everyone and puts the story on the front page. I wonder where AK stands, she shafted her so call pal Tara (if the story is true).

I honestly can't wait for this crowd of muppets to be gone from this university.

For all those people that said antisoc was a stupid joke and a waste of time I hope you are beginning to realise the need for such an organisation.

ninty9er · 15-04-2012 5:30pm

roro1neil0 wrote: »

ninty9er wrote: »

Where did anyone get the impression that I knew before that?

I tagged along to a meeting between Tara and the Director if Student Affairs last semester where the charges were one of a number of possibilities, the Director of Finance told me the same thing and that's the last I heard of it until a few weeks ago.

Why didn't the Union tell you?? There was nothing to tell. There was no developed plan, no meat on the bones, I'm not even sure there is as it stands, but in any case, this is the job of the Welfare Officer, something which I engaged with I we ye course of 2 years when I held that role.

Christ, do ye want to know what I had for breakfast?

Is this it? Your explanation for this fiasco? Nobody told you? This entire debacle is a sick joke. Adam Moursy and Cathal Ronan will have some up hill struggle trying to undo the harm DD and TF have done to this SU. DD, by his own admission, is completely uninformed on anything relevant from a welfare point of view and TF has shown, as was predicted, that she no skills to deal with any of this.

Derek blames Tara. Tara blames Derek. KOB blames everyone and puts the story on the front page. I wonder where AK stands, she shafted her so call pal Tara (if the story is true).

I honestly can't wait for this crowd of muppets to be gone from this university.

For all those people that said antisoc was a stupid joke and a waste of time I hope you are beginning to realise the need for such an organisation.

Ah will you calm down and stop wailing like a panicked 4 year old lost in a shopping centre.

Nobody's blaming anyone, because nothing has gone seriously wrong. There's a communications problem on this issue, but nobody's lost a limb.

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 5:39pm

No derek. This isn't a once off where the memo got lost and someone forgot to tell someone and then something didn't get done and it's bit of a pickle (e.g. presumably renewing the website) but it will all get sorted in the end.

This is a sign of the inherent, widespread, deep rot that is within the current SU. There is a lack of leadership and cohesion, the different officers seem to have no professional working relationship.

It isn't a once off. This is a continuous occurrence. Information, decisions, ideas come from the top (university) and are supposed to filter through the SU so that the important, relevant and interesting stuff is presented to the students as appropriate.

Derek, go and ask any neutral and ask them to look at how you portray yourself on this forum. They will tell you you are condescending, dismissive and smug. You are condescending because you are deciding for me for you think I should know. You are dismissive because you are ignoring all criticism. You are smug because you know your salary is guaranteed and you're out of this kip in a few weeks.

You're almost as bad as KOB responding to radio criticism. You'd swear you came down in the last shower.

Be assured derek, there are plenty more people that feel the same way about you and the SU but don't take the time to remind you. Don't be so foolish as to think this is just one person with a chip on your shoulder, we are many. we are legion.

UL_heart_throb · 15-04-2012 5:42pm

ninty9er wrote: »

Ah will you calm down and stop wailing like a panicked 4 year old lost in a shopping centre.

.

If people paid more attention to wailing toddlers in shopping centres james bulger would still be alive.

wnolan1992 · 15-04-2012 5:53pm

roro1neil0 wrote: »

we are many. we are legion.

Mass Effect 2 reference?

CJKeane · 15-04-2012 5:54pm

wnolan1992 wrote: »

Mass Effect 2 reference?

Think he forgot his medication this morning (or week).

ninty9er · 15-04-2012 5:54pm

roro1neil0 wrote: »

Derek, go and ask any neutral and ask them to look at how you portray yourself on this forum. They will tell you you are condescending, dismissive and smug. You are condescending because you are deciding for me for you think I should know. You are dismissive because you are ignoring all criticism. You are smug because you know your salary is guaranteed and you're out of this kip in a few weeks.

Be assured derek, there are plenty more people that feel the same way about you and the SU but don't take the time to remind you. Don't be so foolish as to think this is just one person with a chip on your shoulder, we are many. we are legion.

If I come across as smug it's not my intention.

I actually do go out and ask neutrals their opinion, I do it as part of a converted effort every week to take the SU to people.

For the most part they don't particularly care, but where they do have issues they are taken on board and taken to the relevant office.

Those who are so quick to criticise would do well to take a view to how they would do things differently given they don't know, nor do they need go know everything that goes on. It would be a complete waste of time and energy to correspond every meeting that takes place.

The issue at hand is people's view on the potential effects of health centre charges. Tara and I had that conversation with Student Affairs months ago, I had it with Student affairs last year and the year before, Catriona had it the year before and maybe Judith even had it the year before.

The premise of attack is that this conversation was not had, in which case the attack is invalidated. Now go find yourself a new conspiracy theory to waste your grey matter on.

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 6:00pm

CJKeane wrote: »

Think he forgot his medication this morning (or week).

look at this, one of kob's friends making crude and inflammatory statements about other people's mental health again. it would be unwise for someone as identifiable as yourself to do this as this is against university policy.

roro1neil0 · 15-04-2012 6:06pm

ninty9er wrote: »

If I come across as smug it's not my intention.

Well at least we know you aimed to come across as condescending and dismissive.

I actually do go out and ask neutrals their opinion, I do it as part of a converted effort every week to take the SU to people.

Concerted.

For the most part they don't particularly care, but where they do have issues they are taken on board and taken to the relevant office.

Of course the majority of people don't care because the majority of people get on with life and don't worry about the SU does and doesn't do. It doesn't mean they shouldn't care, or that their indifference is justified.

Those who are so quick to criticise would do well to take a view to how they would do things differently given they don't know, nor do they need go know everything that goes on. It would be a complete waste of time and energy to correspond every meeting that takes place.

That was what I said, you need to decide what is pertinent to the student body. I don't give a rashers what is said at 99% of the ****ty meetings you go to but I do care when someone tables a motion to slash health centre funding.

The issue at hand is people's view on the potential effects of health centre charges. Tara and I had that conversation with Student Affairs months ago, I had it with Student affairs last year and the year before, Catriona had it the year before and maybe Judith even had it the year before.

Well it's good to know you chat about stuff. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: What was with the knee jerk survey reaction if this thing that been spoken about for months. Why weren't you sending out feelers to the students before xmas asking them what they felt about potential closure/changes/charges in the health centre.

The premise of attack is that this conversation was not had, in which case the attack is invalidated. Now go find yourself a new conspiracy theory to waste your grey matter on.

if this is your attempt at a QED you're more deluded than me. I am running out of steam addressing your half-arsed ****e on this forum.

wnolan1992 · 15-04-2012 6:11pm

ninty9er wrote: »

The premise of attack is that this conversation was not had, in which case the attack is invalidated. Now go find yourself a new conspiracy theory to waste your grey matter on.

Derek, in all fairness, if this conversation was had, then why was an all student email sent out on Wednesday asking for student feedback on the issue in order to organise a campaign?

I'm not doubting that you and Tara had meetings with the relevant Uni boards on the issue, but there was no communication with the student body on this issue.

You've said you knew that charges were coming in weeks ago. Why did you not then raise the issue, either via an email, your blog, the SU Facebook, on boards, on ULFM, etc, etc and try and get a conversation going?

You could have asked how much people would be willing to pay for each service, and then lobby the Uni with these figures to try and get a better deal, because let's face it, charging for STI checks and contraceptive consultations is a retrograde action in the campaign to promote sexual health on campus.

Instead, the information was not released. It was kept until the Uni decided on its own charges scale. And then it was decided that maybe it'd be a good idea to get some student feedback? Any campaign that could have been organised would be pointless given that it was week 11 (now week 12) and frankly, the student body has more pressing concerns than trying to give input into a debate which comes across as already being settled.

So the situation now is, the Uni has come up with a charge structure with no student input, you're leaving in June so any rapport you've built with the relevant authorities over the past 3 years is gone, and then Adam and Cathal will come in, and naturally there'll be a bedding in period where this issue will take a back seat over the more pressing issue of balancing the SU budget, and then it's September, and these charges are in place.

/rant.

Peteee · 15-04-2012 6:26pm

bentoverhard, banned for personal abuse.

I know this is a controversial topic but can we please keep it civil. Theres no need for abuse.

Adam_M · 15-04-2012 6:41pm

wnolan1992 wrote: »

So the situation now is, the Uni has come up with a charge structure with no student input, you're leaving in June so any rapport you've built with the relevant authorities over the past 3 years is gone, and then Adam and Cathal will come in, and naturally there'll be a bedding in period where this issue will take a back seat over the more pressing issue of balancing the SU budget, and then it's September, and these charges are in place.

There’ll be no bedding in period. We have a 2 week (9 days realistically) handover period. After that it will be all up to us. I won’t be naive and think that everything will fall into place and that it will be smooth sailing. The nature of our respective roles means that we cannot rest over the Summer.

With regards to the current issue, when we take up our office, we will establish what its current standing is, as to whether a decision is set in stone or whether it is still just a possibility (I’ve yet to see conclusive comments to prove one way or the other). From there, we will decide on an appropriate action. However, the students of UL have my word that this is not a foregone conclusion. If the University are willing to discuss the actual implementation then we will start there. If they will not budge on the fact it is being implemented, then we will attempt to renegotiate the charges.

This issue will not take a back seat, in the grand scheme of what affects students, it is a major issue.

ninty9er · 15-04-2012 9:05pm

wnolan1992 wrote: »

You've said you knew that charges were coming in weeks ago. Why did you not then raise the issue, either via an email, your blog, the SU Facebook, on boards, on ULFM, etc, etc and try and get a conversation going?

You could have asked how much people would be willing to pay for each service, and then lobby the Uni with these figures to try and get a better deal, because let's face it, charging for STI checks and contraceptive consultations is a retrograde action in the campaign to promote sexual health on campus.

So the situation now is, the Uni has come up with a charge structure with no student input, you're leaving in June so any rapport you've built with the relevant authorities over the past 3 years is gone, and then Adam and Cathal will come in, and naturally there'll be a bedding in period where this issue will take a back seat over the more pressing issue of balancing the SU budget, and then it's September, and these charges are in place.

I did not say I knew weeks ago. I was called to a meeting on a Wednesday afternoon, at 5pm (I know I said a Friday, I've just checked and it was a Wednesday), under the impression I was getting good news (which I did), then this issue was also raised. When I got back to the office I went to/called each officer and asked them to come to my office at 5:30 when they were told what I had been told.

The reason I did not believe, in my political judgment, as a student representative that the issue was so far progressed was that there was no clear indication it was the decided action. Besides that I'm still not convinced, as until the Director of Student Affairs was contacted to comment on the story, the staff in the Health Centre were unaware. This is the reason for the delay in the online version.

In terms of framing and balancing an SU budget, a huge part of my year has been to ensure that this is not the function of sabbats, so apart from seeing a plan for a balanced budget, incoming sabbats will not have to concern themselves with that. It's a staff function and not one that has reasonable cause to distract officers from representative issues. Getting off topic it is also a factor in why we no longer have non-representative officers.

Nockz · 15-04-2012 10:12pm

So who made up the figures? The initial charges? You say An Focal is the first you've heard of them. But, you also said you told each officer what you were told. What happened?

Did An Focal fabricate the numbers? You seem to maintain the charges are still only a possibility.

sceptre · 15-04-2012 10:26pm

Cadroc wrote: »

2 years ago at questions with Don Barry a question was asked about this very thing. Don asked for a show of hands as to who would be for paying for the medical centre rather than something else being implemented (can't remember the alternative). The Class Reps council, which was pretty packed since we were getting our certs, mostly agreed to it rather than the alternative.

Sorry I can't remember what the alternative scenario given actually was, maybe someone else remembers.

Library opening hours, as far as I remember. Even if my memory is faulty (which it probably isn't), library opening hours would be the most logical "this will affect you" alternative for DB to have suggested as an illustrative example.

Obviously it's not as simplistic as an "and/or" but public meetings don't often tend to lend themselves to complicated analyses anyway.

Cadroc · 16-04-2012 1:08am

sceptre wrote: »

Library opening hours, as far as I remember. Even if my memory is faulty (which it probably isn't), library opening hours would be the most logical "this will affect you" alternative for DB to have suggested as an illustrative example.

Obviously it's not as simplistic as an "and/or" but public meetings don't often tend to lend themselves to complicated analyses anyway.

Yeah the Library opening hours were probably a thing at the time, i think they'd been a part of Ruans presidential run...

Although, I would have guessed it was more to do with Tutorials if I was to hazard a guess, and the lack of them. having a Tutorial once every 2 weeks was an issue back then (and still now).

reunion · 16-04-2012 1:18am

Cadroc wrote: »

sceptre wrote: »

Library opening hours, as far as I remember. Even if my memory is faulty (which it probably isn't), library opening hours would be the most logical "this will affect you" alternative for DB to have suggested as an illustrative example.

Obviously it's not as simplistic as an "and/or" but public meetings don't often tend to lend themselves to complicated analyses anyway.

Yeah the Library opening hours were probably a thing at the time, i think they'd been a part of Ruans presidential run...

Although, I would have guessed it was more to do with Tutorials if I was to hazard a guess, and the lack of them. having a Tutorial once every 2 weeks was an issue back then (and still now).

I remember that actually. it was suggested that people who have to go on teaching practise could give previous years (i.e 1st years) tutorials if they didn't get placement (or in general as it looks great on a cv). He couldn't grasp that people were willing to give these for free.

ireland2012 · 16-04-2012 1:31am

There is a mountain being made out of a mole hill here, the SU and its officers are not to blame for any of this,

Its a small charge for medical advice etc,
its far less that a trip to your local GP or A and E,

I think its high time people just get over it and move on there are more important things in live, complaining that you have to pay a small amount for a health service is ridiculous, would people rather not to pay and have a reduced service ?.

Be glad that its there at all, at a time of budget cuts etc. WE all know that third level education is underfunded.

Just be glad that you are in collage at the very least.

roro1neil0 · 16-04-2012 1:53am

I was going to let this slide but then I realised how rancid it is.

ireland2012 wrote: »

There is a mountain being made out of a mole hill here

No it's not.

the SU and its officers are not to blame for any of this

Yes they are.

Its a small charge for medical advice etc

No it's not.

its far less that a trip to your local GP or A and E,

Not if you have a medical card.

I think its high time people just get over it and move on there are more important things in live,

Really, after about a weekend of discussion you think it's worth just moving on and just accepting what ever policy the college gives you.

complaining that you have to pay a small amount for a health service is ridiculous,

rather than complaining you suggest rolling over.

would people rather not to pay and have a reduced service ?.

Who knows. Has anyone thought of asking?

Be glad that its there at all, at a time of budget cuts etc. WE all know that third level education is underfunded.

We are paying for this.

Just be glad that you are in collage at the very least.

You're obviously not, you can't even spell college. You are obviously some relation or personal acquaintance of derek daly and are not actually in UL so I really don't care much for your weakling opinion.

This is the worst shill I've seen in my entire life. Try harder derek.

ireland2012 · 16-04-2012 10:10am

Oh god I spelt a word wrong its hardly the end of the world, and just to make it clear, not that I have to justify myself to you I am a UL student so it does effect me, but I'm not like you making a big deal out of nothing, you would swear people are going to die over this changes.

sceptre · 16-04-2012 10:49am

Mod mode:

This is the last warning you'll see in this thread on not personalising the discussion. If you'd like to continue taking part in the discussion, you'd be best advised to not do that. Your call really - if your primary focus is personalising it and insulting people, you're not adding anything useful anyway.

Non-mod mode:

Cadroc wrote: »

Yeah the Library opening hours were probably a thing at the time, i think they'd been a part of Ruans presidential run...

Although, I would have guessed it was more to do with Tutorials if I was to hazard a guess, and the lack of them. having a Tutorial once every 2 weeks was an issue back then (and still now).

Could well have been. Either way, something that people would have put higher on the pecking order (which, of course, was the entire purpose in posing the question:). It wasn't a choice where the outcome of opinion was going to be uncertain.)

JoeCares · 16-04-2012 3:21pm

roro1neil0 wrote: »

No derek. This isn't a once off where the memo got lost and someone forgot to tell someone and then something didn't get done and it's bit of a pickle (e.g. presumably renewing the website) but it will all get sorted in the end.

This is a sign of the inherent, widespread, deep rot that is within the current SU. There is a lack of leadership and cohesion, the different officers seem to have no professional working relationship.

It isn't a once off. This is a continuous occurrence. Information, decisions, ideas come from the top (university) and are supposed to filter through the SU so that the important, relevant and interesting stuff is presented to the students as appropriate.

Derek, go and ask any neutral and ask them to look at how you portray yourself on this forum. They will tell you you are condescending, dismissive and smug. You are condescending because you are deciding for me for you think I should know. You are dismissive because you are ignoring all criticism. You are smug because you know your salary is guaranteed and you're out of this kip in a few weeks.

You're almost as bad as KOB responding to radio criticism. You'd swear you came down in the last shower.

Be assured derek, there are plenty more people that feel the same way about you and the SU but don't take the time to remind you. Don't be so foolish as to think this is just one person with a chip on your shoulder, we are many. we are legion.

This has to be the best sum up of the situation. Well done.

Derek i think you really need to read that post carefully, very carefully. There is a reason the general student public have reacted as they have. It is not the fact that student charges have come in, it is how it has happened and how the SU have dealt with it. This has been building for quite some time. People have let you off before and given you the benefit of the doubt.

You have failed to confront issues as they have emerged and deal with them in a professional manner, you let your sabbat team fall apart under your eyes. You need to learn to take responsibility boy.

We havent heard you take responsibility for anything that has happened within the union this year. This will go down on record as one of the worst years for the SU.

There is a reason that people are so pissed off and dont be so arrogant as to think of us students as mear peasants that are a nuisance to you swanning around with the big boys.

I have been following the SU for a good number of years now and have never felt the need to comment on their actions. I hope things pick up for my final year.

I hope you are smart enough to learn from this one....

SarahBeep! · 17-04-2012 11:12am

sceptre wrote: »

Library opening hours, as far as I remember. Even if my memory is faulty (which it probably isn't), library opening hours would be the most logical "this will affect you" alternative for DB to have suggested as an illustrative example.

Obviously it's not as simplistic as an "and/or" but public meetings don't often tend to lend themselves to complicated analyses anyway.

If I remember correctly there was also a mention of an extra charge for Graduations too??

reunion wrote: »

I remember that actually. it was suggested that people who have to go on teaching practise could give previous years (i.e 1st years) tutorials if they didn't get placement (or in general as it looks great on a cv). He couldn't grasp that people were willing to give these for free.

That's nice in an ideal world but it'd be pointless. As a teacher you HAVE to get placement otherwise you take a year out and they try again the following year (this has never actually happened, every student HAS been offered a place every year) because without your teaching hours in a school your four years are pointless. And the teaching council would never allow it.

sceptre · 17-04-2012 11:31am

SarahBeep! wrote: »

If I remember correctly there was also a mention of an extra charge for Graduations too??

Yes, you do. There was.

It all comes flooding back. Well, bits of it:)

You'd almost expect there to have been a mention of adding a turnstile with a daily euro charge for getting in...

ninty9er · 17-04-2012 12:05pm

I've done some digging and found this which was sent on 7th October as a list of services that we would consider necessary for the Health Centre. Note that it was stated 'if there is to be a charge'. It was bound by the proviso that we had no way of knowing what levels of usage are so we were working off a working day basis rather than patient numbers as there isn't an electronic system to give that info.

GP Clinics (at least 3 per day 1.5 Friday) – Hours Posted/ Number of doctors available at given hours posted
General Nurse Clinic (at least 3 per day 1.5 Friday) – Hours Posted/ Number of nurses available
Contraceptive Clinic (at least 2 per week) – Hour Posted
STI (testing) Clinic (at least 2 per week) – Hours Posted
Psychiatric clinic (at least 1 per week) – Appointment only

SHC Feedback email address – Students Union/ Director of Student Affairs / SHC Manager all copied.
Student satisfaction survey emailed to each student who uses the facility.
Administrative desk – doctors/nurses should be seeing patients, where paperwork is not bound by professional knowledge remove it from their desks.
Management review committee to deal with feedback issues.

Clinic defined as 4 hour patient facing period excluding administration.
Student Wellbeing Hub - first point of call merged with Counselling and Chaplaincy. Welcoming and well ventilated.

If there is to be a charge a breakdown of how many nurse hours, doctor hours and ancillary clinic hours will be provided. The current cost of seeing a doctor in LIT is €6.

SarahBeep! · 17-04-2012 12:07pm

The current cost of seeing a doctor in LIT is manageable.

ninty9er · 17-04-2012 1:01pm

Yes, which is why we cited it.

roro1neil0 · 18-04-2012 12:06am

don't be so bloody rude derek just do the job you are paid to do.

mayo_lad · 18-04-2012 12:48am

the most shocking thing about this announcement was that i was held back from the students for a weekend or more to allow the last issue of an focal would have a good headline . the fact that something like this is in the in process of being implemented dose not shock me . but the fact that students will have to pay for what was a free service will mean that the public know deserve to know all details about how the service is organized and funded as well as if there is any money being wasted in the students health center.

Dante on Fire · 18-04-2012 1:38pm

Hi all,

Just to let you know about the following which has been posted on our facebook and via emails.

We are out and about for the next two days to rally students to this.

Union Forum - Medical Centre

Medical Centre Charges - Union Forum.
Venue Schrodinger Building -SR3006
Date: Thursday 19th of April
Time 3-5pm

This is the Student's opportunity to discuss and hit back against recent decision making relating to the proposed Medical Centre charges.

Bernadette Walsh of Student Affairs and VPAR Paul McCutcheon have been invited to attend as the key University members involved with this decision.

Make sure you are there and your voice is heard.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FoIFT3dhzQ&feature=youtu.be

Thank you and if you have any questions or queries give me a shout on:
paddy.rockett@ul.ie

Paddy Rockett
Campaigns and Services Officer
Oifigeach Feachtais agus Seirbhísí

University of Limerick Students' Union
061 213542 | 086 0435303
sucso@ul.ie| www.ulsu.ie
www.facebook.com/ulstudentsunion

roro1neil0 · 18-04-2012 1:57pm

Dante on Fire wrote: »

Bernadette Walsh of Student Affairs and VPAR Paul McCutcheon have been invited to attend as the key University members involved with this decision.

have they confirmed their attendance yet?

OneMoreThing! · 18-04-2012 7:47pm

Alternate plan to fund Medical Centre It seems that we have been uninformed for quite some time. Tomorrow's forum will be even more interesting... Oh the bant!

Cossax · 18-04-2012 7:59pm

OneMoreThing! wrote: »

Alternate plan to fund Medical Centre It seems that we have been uninformed for quite some time. Tomorrow's forum will be even more interesting... Oh the bant!

Think you mean this link?

OneMoreThing! · 18-04-2012 8:06pm

Cossax wrote: »

Think you mean this link?

Indeed I do. Sorry about that one

Fishooks12 · 18-04-2012 10:09pm

yekahS wrote: »

Students taxpayers? Don't make me laugh pal. Any of the ones who do manage to work, work handy jobs behind a cashier in an offie, or making sandwiches in a deli. So even if they are paying tax, its a measly amount, and not enough to remotely cover the services they receive from the state.

No, its left to hard-working taxpayers to fund these 3/4-year holiday camps where some priveleged young fella can get an arts degree, whilst drinking every night of the week, and staying up all night playing xbox.

Its high time some of this entitlement culture embedded in the student culture in Ireland caught up with the real world.

On the issue of the medical centre. Shouldn't be funded by the university. Universities are there to educate, not look after the health of the students. That's the remit of the HSE, and students should be part of the public system like anyone else, and if they want to go the private route, then off with them, but I shouldn't have to pay it.

Most ignorant comment I've ever seen

wnolan1992 · 18-04-2012 10:20pm

God damn, would've loved to go to that forum. Stupid lab exam.

Will TST be recording it? (Long shot I know :P )

Steeevvyb · 18-04-2012 10:33pm

Hopefully we will be, Will!

ninty9er · 19-04-2012 12:49pm

shabouwcaw wrote: »

So the penalty for not having a balanced budget is what exactly? A fine? Financial sanctions? That's pretty smart. Make it more difficult to balance the budget because you didnt balance the budget. This country.

Either that's the stupidest policy known to man, it's entirely ineffectual (i.e. it's a slap on the wrist) or its not true.

I've attached the Employment Control Framework. The sanctions aren't financial, rather operational. To be able to continue to fill vacancies budgets must be balanced.

3 (c) is the relevant section.

Gael23 · 19-04-2012 6:47pm

Spent nearly 3 hours at the forum with Bernadette Walsh today. I dont know if it will achieve anything but I think she took our concerns on board and actually did listen. Couldnt help thinking that her only aim in all this is to balance the books and to hell with what students think

Fishooks12 · 19-04-2012 7:18pm

Ok the fees will have to be paid, times are tough and all. I'm just glad that the SU informed the student body when they were made aware of the proposal in November

At least we got to have our say before the decision was made

.............oh wait

Cadroc · 19-04-2012 8:05pm

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Ok the fees will have to be paid, times are tough and all. I'm just glad that the SU informed the student body when they were made aware of the proposal in November

At least we got to have our say before the decision was made

.............oh wait

Out of curiosity, were you at the Forum?

Fishooks12 · 19-04-2012 8:08pm

Cadroc wrote: »

Out of curiosity, were you at the Forum?

Nope on erasmus in Spain at the moment so would have been tough to get there

But like I said, the decisions have been made. Why wasn't this forum organised in November when the possibility of charges was raised to Derek Daly?

Cadroc · 19-04-2012 8:19pm

Fishooks12 wrote: »

Nope on erasmus in Spain at the moment so would have been tough to get there

But like I said, the decisions have been made. Why wasn't this forum organised in November when the possibility of charges was raised to Derek Daly?

As far as I know, I'm sure someone else will know further, but the Union has been told that there is a possibility that charges will be introduced for the past number of years and reasonably expected them not to be introduced. The Union was aware that some fees might be introduced but weren't made aware of what they may be, and some University staff ignored emails and requests from the students for a long period of time. The decision was also made by the Exec Committee of the university, the only committee where a Student Representative isn't sitting on the board.

The reason we found out in An Focal and not before it was issued is apparently due to a request by the University to allow them to tell staff about this.. According to TST, this didn't happen.

Student Medical Center to Start Charging

Comments