So what's wrong with the SU?

MaxBax

agent smith wrote:

ALERT: SERRIOUS POST]

where can i get the free condoms?

Agent Smith

Go up to stephs Office and ask her, or ask me, i have some left over from freshers week

MaxBax

cool. if this works out i'll change my favourite su officer stance.

cuckoo

Danger Bob wrote:

I'm liking this. Susan, you're a worthy foil. Dee, nice work too. However, I think you've done the two things I hoped no one would do. First of all, I was hoping this wouldn't become a big top trumps hack-off. Secondly, I was hoping to avoid it getting personal. But anyhoo, in response......

Rob (=danger bob), i (=susan) haven't been too personal i hope in this thread, but re-reading your first post i'm still with my original unvoiced opinion on it, you were kind of spoiling for a fight. You type of being 'disgusted' with people's opinions. And fair enough, i like a good message board nitty gritty, point scoring, back and forth probably more than the next person. Also, it's a good time of year, as we're beginning to head into exam season a bit of distraction is nice.

Danger Bob wrote:

I think my "Trust me, we're better off in than out" comment re:USI was a bit poorly phrased.

We agree on something! Hey, i've done it too, read over something i've written and wondered where my brain had been disengaged to. So, i hope you can understand my gleeful devilment in playing top trumps on this one, you brought the exec hoodie into it yourself in your first post and made it a legit target.

Danger Bob wrote:

Also, to agree with Susan, yes we should re-examine it every year. But, sure haven't we been doing that? I don't get what you're getting at.

What i'm getting at is that if people are expressing misgivings they should be addressed openly, in as public a fashion as possible. For instance, the working group formed to look into it this year was elected at council, so all members of council knew what was going on. That's a good thing, so that there can be no impression left of the 'su clique' suiting themselves. My one caveat would be that the meetings weren't publicised to the entire SU membership - that way you'd have left yourselves like caesar's wife, above all complaints after the fact as you could respond with 'well, they were open meetings and anyone could have attended'.

Danger Bob wrote:

Anyway, this is all INCREDIBLY off topic. If either of you want to carry on these secondary debates, feel free to drop me an e-mail (social@tcdsu.org) or just accost me in college some day, or start a "Why Rob is a dick" thread. I think Boards is crying out for one of them. I just started this thread to get to the root of why it's so acceptable to slag off the SU, rather than to get into personal arguments with people I respect over the workings of USI. Believe me, I've had enough of them already. I'd hope we can keep to the point. I'll post on the actual topic in a little while when I've properly woken up. I may still be cranky.

Rob, i don't think boards is crying out for a Rob is a dick thread. That'd take away from valuable 'i'm in the arts block'/'i hate the rain'/'exams -arrgh'/'my favourite old skool computer game'/'i have a hangover' posting time.

If the SU is all of us, all students, which i agree with you on, then don't take any criticism personally. If people are moaning and groaning about the Education Officer next year, well, then you'll have a problem that you'll need to sort out, but if it's the usual level of 'what have they ever done for me?' look at the unions internal PR machine, and focus on getting good stuff done in your own role that can be broadcast to ppl.

Originally Posted by Danger Bob
WTF? Of course the SU claims to be for everybody. The SU IS everybody. I read a comment which I can't find now where someone said that members of Exec think the SU is just them but that's just not true. Everyone posting here is an SU member. Whether you like the idea of being involved or not, you are involved. I'm never gonna be a union Nazi and start dragging people into House 6 and forcing them to become class reps but I do expect students to give credit where it's due. Any student who says the SU does nothing for them is either lying or very short-sighted.

And, i've addressed this upthread, but calling members of the union that you will be paid to represent liars or short-sighted is going to get ppls heckles up and will dictate the tone of the subsequent debate.

So, rob, if you're willing to continue this:

why is tcdsu.org so crap?
why do you think so many ppl have agreed that a significant number of the Exec dislike TN?
where have you read stories of the SU not doing what they have done?

off topic/ anyone else read Agent Smith's post up there and think 'manifesto'?

shay_562

I kinda like the SU. I'm not involved with it at all (except for some by-proxy hackery), but I can see that I'm getting my money's worth (that €8 I paid at the start of the year has been more than given back in pens, water and condoms) and the tiny economist growing inside of me likes that. In general, they seem to be working hard for us to try and make college as smooth a ride as possible, and while I haven't actually had to go to an Education or Welfare officer with problems, my understanding is that they (ie, the positions in general) are pretty useful facilities to have. I don't think the SU needs to be as proactive as some people would like it to be. I don't expect wonderous, world-changing things from someone a year older than me working for a year in an environment where they don't always have a huge amount of power to achieve things; I think the main role of the SU is reactionary, to solve problems for students, advocate on students' behalf and maybe to try and improve small things around college (like the couches and water fountains, as has been said several times already).

There are plenty of problems with it as an organisation that have already been outlined. It's intensely cliquey and secretive (I wouldn't know anything that happened in there if I didn't come here). It has a bad habit of doing stupid **** one minute then trying to be a respectable organisation the next (the wands thing was funny as hell, but made the union as a whole look immature). Cuckoo's already pointed out how ****ty the SU website is, and why that's not acceptable (not to get into personal attacks here, but what exactly does the VP do on a weekly basis if not maintain the website? I can't imagine putting the Record together took the entire 6 months of college so far). But TBH, I'm not sure that the SU would be all that much more popular even if they rectified all these problems - a lot of people are just completely disinterested and will always be that way.

Rob, because David Quinn said something in a debate by the Phil does not make it famous. In fact, it makes it a horrific in-joke.

In Rob's defense, he repeated that same horrific in-joke (or some very similar variation thereof) at every single speech he made to BESS (and that was a lot - he knew where his support base was) and again at the dining hall hustings, so while "famous" might be overstating it slightly, at least it was spread around college.

gilroyb

shay_562 wrote:

I kinda like the SU. I'm not involved with it at all (except for some by-proxy hackery), but I can see that I'm getting my money's worth (that €8 I paid at the start of the year has been more than given back in pens, water and condoms) and the tiny economist growing inside of me likes that.

The union get a lot more money per student than that. They get money from the 'registration fee' if I remember correctly?

What is the joke Quinn used? I'm in BESS but didn't hear it. As I mentioned before no one came to any of my lectures.

Danger Bob

I'm back. Less cranky this time. Felt the need to fight my corner again. So...

(I apologise as this may be another LONG post...)

Cuckoo wrote:

why is tcdsu.org so crap?

I dunno. Ask the guys who made it. Or Tom. It's crap and that's a flaw but I can't personally respond to that question. However, what I can do is say that, as an incoming officer, I've spoken to the incoming dep pres about it and I'm confident that it'll be sorted out as soon as he can get his hands on the reins. In fact, you may be hearing about it fairly soon. I can also pledge to come through on my manifesto promise to add academic information on it and to create a database of summer placements on it but that's all I can really say on the matter. I can't speak for other people involved. However, I don't believe for a second that people hate the SU because the website's not as good as it could be. I might be wrong but that's just what I think.

Cuckoo wrote:

why do you think so many ppl have agreed that a significant number of the Exec dislike TN?

Because it was minuted that way. I can personally say that I have no real problem with them and most of the people I know from exec are the same, afaik. Even John who was minuted as making those comments actually speaks quite favourably of them. I don't exactly love everything they say about the SU but I think they're extremely necessary and MissSunshine, even though we disagree on the general exec feeling, I agree that the SU needs TN and TN needs the SU.

Cuckoo wrote:

where have you read stories of the SU not doing what they have done?

Cuckoo wrote:

calling members of the union that you will be paid to represent liars or short-sighted is going to get ppls heckles up and will dictate the tone of the subsequent debate

Might as well take those two together. I think the first one was a misinterpretation of what I said. I said I was still hearing stories of how the SU weren't doing what they actually do. I was referring to a couple of comments in this thread which suggested that the SU officers don't do the little things for students, when in fact, I think they do the little things quite well. On the second point, if a student says that the SU does nothing for them, they are incorrect. Simple as. If that student knows they are incorrect when saying it, they are lying and if they don't realise, then they haven't really examined the situation which, in my opinion makes them short-sighted (metaphorically of course, I'm not criticising myopia sufferers.) I stand by that. It probably doesn't read too nicely but it's true.

Aside from Rob vs Susan (just kidding), I actually really appreciate some of the candid responses here. This thread is not intended to offend and to reiterate an earlier point, I'm not trying to push for everyone to start loving the SU. It's simply that if I'm going to be involved in running an organisation, I'd like to know what it's problems are. I don't want to simply accept the disinterest and distaste towards the union, I'd rather see if we can try to change it. I know that the best way for me to do that would be just to get on with doing a good job come July but I think it's fair of me to ask these questions.

So, am I right in suggesting (from gathering the opinions I've read so far) that the main problems with the SU are...

...that there's a certain sense of a lack of inclusion? ie. the sentiments about it being a clique?

...that the officers are a little out of touch with the body student body?

...and that the levels of communication just aren't good enough?

Also, I think Awayinthehills put it quite well when she suggested that apathy is cool. I'd like to believe that she was wrong but I thinks she's probably right. SO...is it right for the SU officers to combat this or should we just leave it be? If students are happy to be apathetic, is it our place to try to change this?

Oh and finally...

Comhra wrote:

So what's wrong with the SU? Its' image! People are spending too long giving out about people badmouthing the union. Why don't they shut up and get on with their work! Forget about what people are saying, prove them wrong by accomplishing things! What was it my Mom used to say...sticks and stones...

Good point. But my issue isn't as much with the badmouthing as with the core problems. The badmouthing is obviously due to more deep-rooted problems which, unfortunately, don't seem to be reparable just by everyone doing a good job. That may sound silly but what I'm getting at is that if people have a fundamental dislike for something despite it being a benevolent force, then how can you expect these people to care when it does more good? My major concern would be if we ever need to truly mobilise the student body and they've all become so disconnected that they don't care. I'm well aware that if that happens then it's just as much the Sabbats' fault as the students' but that's why I'm here trying to work out the flaws. If I sound like I'm bitching about a few anti-SU comments, I'm sorry. I'm actually trying to find the root of the problem.

Before I go, gilroyb, what year BESS are you? And what subjects?

Anyway, over to y'all...

Danger Bob

Oh and...

MaxBax wrote:

danger bob are you the incoming education officer? i have to say i like your attitude. fair play.

Thanks. Always nice to hear it.

Cuckoo wrote:

off topic/ anyone else read Agent Smith's post up there and think 'manifesto'?

Indeed. And he spoke on a couple of welfare-motions at USI congress. Talk about early campaigning....

Danger Bob

Danger Bob wrote:

Because it was minuted that way. I can personally say that I have no real problem with them and most of the people I know from exec are the same, afaik. Even John who was minuted as making those comments actually speaks quite favourably of them. I don't exactly love everything they say about the SU but I think they're extremely necessary and MissSunshine, even though we disagree on the general exec feeling, I agree that the SU needs TN and TN needs the SU.

Thanks Rob, although you may differ on opinions, Exec has agreed on the minutes that I have produced every single week (with a few corrections here and there). They may be quite long, but they are a true and accurate record of what happened at each meeting, which means that if it is minuted, it happened. So if you have a problem with the minutes, you know my e-mail address, it being education@tcdsu.org - and personally, I'd prefer you talk to my face about any problems you have with the minutes, rather then post on a message board about them, you being a member of Exec who agrees to the minutes and all...

Comhra....

First of all Rob I do not want to set up a "Rob is a dick" thread. I don't think you are a dick, I think you are quite nice actually, maybe a little naive but nice all the same. What is it with incoming sabbats thinking I'm out to get them?

Second of all thank you so much for telling me I had done a "nice job" by being able to type my opinion and post it on the internet all by myself. I hope you will be as patronising when dealing with the president next year.

I really don't think cuckoo and myself have gone "off topic" here and I also think it inappropriate and unneccesary for us to have to contact you privately. We are merely joining a public debate, which you started. I don't have a problem with you Rob but if you start a thread with a post like that, all guns blazing, you have to be willing to accept some criticism. The world isn't just one big happy family with everyone liking everyone, people are going to say you are doing a bad job next year whether you are or not. You just have to accept it because that's the way it is.

I have to totally agree with cuckoo's point about the "open" and "public" USI review group meetings. I remember distinctly asking if they would be publicised and I was told yes. I never saw one poster and I was looking out for them. I wonder how many of this years incoming sabbats had the word "transparent" in their manifestoes this year. Just a thought to ponder.

Ok I've been accused of being a bit harsh (that's the censored version) in this thread but I have to say that I think my responses have been justified, they are after all my opinions. I have been involved in the SU since I started college, I've been a class rep for two years and I sat on exec last year. I come from the most SU unfriendly department in college, statisically we are the least represented department and that's because of apathy. I have asked students in my department why they don't want to get involved and why they don't vote and I respect and understand where they are coming from. Yes I've tried to talk them around but you know what worked much better than that? Just getting on with the job that I was elected to do, represent them. As a member of council and more importantly as a student I have every right to question the actions of any sabbatical officer elected to represent me.

MaxBax

HI TO ALL THE SU PPL THAT LURK HERE

/me waves

Barry Aldwell

Awayindahils wrote:

An accepted norm, freshers week i scoffed at my friend who was going to run for class rep

Yeah, but which one of us ended up as a class rep?!

(I decided not to run for class rep, I thought that someone with more free time could do a better job of it. I was proven wrong)

Danger Bob

Myth wrote:

Thanks Rob, although you may differ on opinions, Exec has agreed on the minutes that I have produced every single week (with a few corrections here and there). They may be quite long, but they are a true and accurate record of what happened at each meeting, which means that if it is minuted, it happened. So if you have a problem with the minutes, you know my e-mail address, it being education@tcdsu.org - and personally, I'd prefer you talk to my face about any problems you have with the minutes, rather then post on a message board about them, you being a member of Exec who agrees to the minutes and all...

Em...wtf? Yeah I agreed to the minutes. They were a true and accurate reflection of the meeting. John did say those things. As did other people who were minuted. Actually, I remember writing earlier in this thread that your minutes are quite accurate. And you should know by now that when I even have a silly little problem with minutes, I make sure and get them changed.

My point was that if you just read Exec minutes, you might get a very different view of members' opinions than if you know those people. The quite accurate minutes show that John said whatever about John Lavelle. And he did. However, I know from speaking to John a lot about TN that he has a lot of respect for their journalists. If people want to say that because they read the minutes from whenever, that they know that Exec hates TN, then I'm going to deny that. I don't hate TN, I don't think you do and I know, as a matter of fact that the majority of exec members don't. However, if someone just reads minutes, they might think otherwise. That wasn't a criticism of your minutes. It's just the way it is. You could write the world's greatest minutes and still you could never truly express the opinions of everyone involved in the meeting. Actually, I'm kinda shocked by that reaction.

Comhra wrote:

I have to totally agree with cuckoo's point about the "open" and "public" USI review group meetings. I remember distinctly asking if they would be publicised and I was told yes. I never saw one poster and I was looking out for them. I wonder how many of this years incoming sabbats had the word "transparent" in their manifestoes this year. Just a thought to ponder.

Yet again with a nice dig there. I did my best with those meetings and perhaps failed in making them as open as I'd hoped for them to be. However, a few people not actually on the group turned up to meetings and I immediately started including them in any group e-mails/texts sent out. Both yourself and Susan witnessed the fun of me trying to pin numerous busy people down to a time and place for the first meeting. That made it very difficult to publicise as often meetings had to be called at short notice. My fault but I did my best to include anyone who wanted inclusion. As for yourself and Susan, realistically neither of you had to look for posters to find out when meetings were on. If you'd wanted to participate, you could have. I believe you live with a member of the group and are going out with another. Both of these people have all my contact details also. While the job was mine to inform, anyone interested could have easily found out the info by contacting myself or other members. However, I get your point and I did actually apologise to the members numerous times that due to my workload as a student and a convenor, I didn't do a perfect job on it. While students like yourself could have taken part, it would have been very difficult for the average student to come along and throw in their two cents so I'm sorry. I assure you that I have learned a lot from that whole process.

However, I don't believe that you've joined a public debate. I think you've kinda created your own one. I asked a quite simple question. "What's wrong with the SU?" But your responses have been more to do with what's wrong with me or my posts. (Maybe me and my posts ARE what's wrong with the SU but I'd hope not.) You'd swear I'd started a thread entitled, "So what's so bad about eating babies?" Also, you seem to be deliberately misinterpretting my points. ie. suggesting that I was only in the job for praise and accusing me of being patronising for commending you on adding some decent points to the debate. If someone I'd never spoken to was taking me up wrong on these things, I'd be puzzled enough but I'd have hoped you'd have figured me out a little better than that even through our limited meetings. That's why I hoped that issues you had with me over our USI group could be handled a different way. I didn't want that discussion to take over this thread and thought that, as I know you, that we could talk out any such differences in a different manner.

Anyway, I'd rather this didn't become something to fall out over. For the record, even though you think I'm naive, I think you're alright really. If you think I was spoiling for a fight, then obviously my phrasiology needs to be worked on. I actually thought I was doing a good thing by trying to be proactive on the issue but if I'm wrong, then let's just kill this thread and I'll go back to the drawing board.

cuckoo

Danger Bob wrote:

Yet again with a nice dig there. I did my best with those meetings and perhaps failed in making them as open as I'd hoped for them to be. However, a few people not actually on the group turned up to meetings and I immediately started including them in any group e-mails/texts sent out. Both yourself and Susan witnessed the fun of me trying to pin numerous busy people down to a time and place for the first meeting. That made it very difficult to publicise as often meetings had to be called at short notice. My fault but I did my best to include anyone who wanted inclusion. As for yourself and Susan, realistically neither of you had to look for posters to find out when meetings were on. If you'd wanted to participate, you could have. I believe you live with a member of the group and are going out with another. Both of these people have all my contact details also. While the job was mine to inform, anyone interested could have easily found out the info by contacting myself or other members. However, I get your point and I did actually apologise to the members numerous times that due to my workload as a student and a convenor, I didn't do a perfect job on it. While students like yourself could have taken part, it would have been very difficult for the average student to come along and throw in their two cents so I'm sorry. I assure you that I have learned a lot from that whole process.

I don't know if it's a practical solution for the communication and publicity problems experienced by the SU this year for every student to start dating/moving in with members of committees that they would be interested in the working of.

And, while i'd like to think of myself as not being 'average' (and my mammy agrees with me, but that's kind of her job) i wonder at your usage of the term up there. Are ppl who are actively involved in the SU above or below the 'average' rank you've assigned the vast majority of students to? Or, is it just a term of phrase? So far the members of the SU who claim they see nothing being done for them are liars or short-sighted, now the rest of us are 'average'.

Yeah, this is the quoting, point scoring medium of an internet BB, but language matters. You suggest that we should ignore the minutes of exec minutes, because apparently what's said when members are in the 'official' role at a meeting is not a true reflection of them, but i disagree with that. I'd have thought with the awareness that such accurate minutes are taken that people would choose their words carefully to reflect their opinions.

Finally, i'd like to second Comhra on this - i'm also not out to 'get' anyone. I'm just a little frustrated, that i feel this year the communication, publicity and workings of the SU haven't been as successful as they might have been. There's been a definite lack of focus, for instance the registration fee 'campaign' - was the SU in favour of or opposed to that fee? I saw the posters and the euro note leaflets around the place and i don't know what the message was.

Stargal

I agree that the SU needs TN and TN needs the SU.

RAOTFLMAO!

Back to the dissertation...

Andrew 83

Just to start with I think it's very unfair to say most people who get involved in the SU get involved for the CV. I'm sure a lot of class reps do (witness the numbers who don't attend Council for instance) but I don't think those who get more involved do. I was pretty active in the SU, serving as a class rep, convenor, on committees, and even ran for election. I did none of that for my CV though, let's face it - what employer is going to care if you were involved in the SU? Furthermore in the Celtic Tiger Ireland they'd probably see it as somewhat of a negative thing.

In terms of what's wrong with the SU I don't think anything really is. While obviously I think some of the targetting of TN has been ridiculous and unfair I think everything's pretty much cool now. The problem is a more widespread one. I think everyone thinks everything going pretty well right now so don't feel the need to get involved and because they're pretty happy they also aren't really crying out for the SU to do anything.

Personally I'd rather if the SU did more on the boycott advertising and took a more active role in broader social issues, it's with pride that I helped get through a motion (by about one vote) to oppose the citizenship referendum. But maybe that's just me.

The most important challenge for the SU this year is to stop the Health Centre charges coming in. That's what really shocked me about those aforementioned minutes. I was really surprised just how many of the members of exec were in favour of charges coming in. Health care should be free, NATIONALLY not just in college. We don't have it nationally right now but it's essential we have it in college. I remember on Steph's manifesto when she ran she pointed out how few a percentage of students use the health centre yet now alot of exec are buying into the argument that students are somehow 'abusing' the system by going to it when their families could afford a GP (this is backed up by the failure to substantially try to attack the policy of not letting Dubs go to the health centre at the moment for some things). Using a system you have a right to isn't an abuse. Likewise agreeing with the college that there is too much pressure on the system is wrong - if the numbers using the health centre have gone up fair play to Steph and everyone else who's publicised the service. However I don't they've gone up that much. If there was a proper awareness of the health centre what's going to happen then? Should we feel that we should keep the health centre on the quiet (and away from those who might need it) just to satisfy s desire to keep the numbers manageable? No, it should be funded and expanded.

I remember a few years ago fees for the health centre were right on the verge of coming in but the SU fought well and kept them out. Then when I was on exec last year there was a big increase in the Registration Fee. When we got the breakdown of where the money was going almost none was going to the health centre and instead a lot was going to some very dubious places. The general view was that the college were intentionally underfunding the health centre so that there would be no choice but to introduce fees in order to keep it going. Once fees were brought in funding could then be cut further/removed as fees would sustain it. We all agreed that this needed to be fought tooth and nail. Yet where's the attack on this this year? Where the front page of the Record attacking it, where's the mass SU campaign etc? I put it in an editorial and we had that front page story but I haven't seen anything else on it. The test of the SU is these fees. If they go through that's what's wrong with the SU.

In an aside kudos to Rob, reading those minutes he made one of the best contributions and was clearly against fees. He asked when have you ever heard of a fee that went down or something along those lines. Once fees are in they're not going and they're not staying at the same price. We need to protect our 'free' services, the ones we're actually paying for through the registration fee!

Finally yes the UCD SU may do more than the TCD one in many ways, but that's because the college here provides so much. Over there the SU runs the Health Centre, luckily our SU doesn't have to as college get more involved in these things.

PHB

Please list for me what the SU does for me:

This is a serious question, list for me the positive effect it has on my college life
The only things I've got from the SU in my mind is:

The water fountains in the Arts block

SOL

So, USI, how best to waste 80,000 euro? anyone? I suppose you could start by spending 11,000 sending 22 people on a 5 day junket to some arsehole in down the country, to get locked and talk nonsense about urellevant things. Next you would want to pay a hefty subscription to keep the sabats in there usi office doing a large ammount of SFA. Any more questions? Oh yes of course any organisation willing to subscribe to this nonsense would obviously have do do other things in its spare time like say ban coke for speculative reasons while continuing to have more then the legal level of advertising for ciggarette companies in their shops, but hey whats wrong with the SU sure they're trying aren;t they?

gilroyb

gilroyb wrote:

The union get a lot more money per student than that. They get money from the 'registration fee' if I remember correctly?

Yep, the €8 mentioned below (or above!) is to do with USI, not the SU. The SU gets its money out of the registration fee, as do the other capitated bodies (CSC, DUCAC, GSU & Publications).

gilroyb

Andrew 83 wrote:

Personally I'd rather if the SU did more on the boycott advertising and took a more active role in broader social issues, it's with pride that I helped get through a motion (by about one vote) to oppose the citizenship referendum. But maybe that's just me.

Just as an aside, there was a case in the European Courts where a Danish worker successfully brought a case against being forced to join a union as it was a breech of his 'freedom of association' rights. I'm not so disheartened by the SU to bring a case against them, but the more political it is, the more likely that some up and coming law student will make their name by making the justifiable case that attending a government sponsored organisation shouldn't involve being forced into a political organisation. As long as the SU is not just a technical support service, it technically doesn't have the right to insist all students join it.

Crash

SOL wrote:

...I suppose you could start by spending 11,000 sending 22 people on a 5 day junket...

and WHAT a junket

Awayindahils

I agree with most of what has been said here in terms of whats wrong with the union.

There is an absolute absence of on the ground activity in terms of what the SU does. When im asked by people what the su does for them i say we talk to people on committees, and we have parties and the fountains in the arts block.. Mannions in the pav every friday. Thats about it. I know that the SU do stuff but only because im actually involved in doing some of that said stuff. The union needs to get into really selling its campains, providng the information, not just in terms of links on emails, but posters and addresses where possible. I know that these addresses are the remit of the class reps, but for really high profile issues such as the helath service charges, somoene who is known as being a figure head of the union needs to talk to lecturs, in particular in first year. I am not saying that reps shoul dbe allowed to shirk their responsibilities, and its disgraceful how many act, but for things whioch are as serious as the fees issue, some one who is properly involved and informed should be able to inform people not just the partially informed reps. To be honest the whole fees thing went right by me until i went and read everything again.

There does also need to be a resyncranisation as such. the union seems to be in tatters, with different people putting huge efforts into completely seperate issues and due to the diviserity of issues achieving nothing. At the start fo the year the registartion fee was the issue, you were going to get us a break down of what was happening. In my opinion the oblisment of the fee is far too idealistic a goal. More realistic goals need to be set if the union is to achieve anything. A break down yes, so that we can know what is going on with our money. Thats a good idea and essential so that we can build other campians around that. Having gotten this break down of fees, there then should be an absolute stand off over anywhere the college attempts ot bring in fees which are covered by the registration fee.

after that the exams campain has been brilliant, it makes the union look good, the students are pleased with it. its a good solid campian which can be sustained for years.

So what else, there was more to say but just to add this in, the people here who are commenting for and against the union, and after the union, all seem to have some sort of union expierence. Those who are not invloved are not posting and this is only within one very small sphere of TCD interest. and more worringly there is an unusual amount of general involvment in college activities as a whole among the regular posters on this site. so we getting comments from the informed, those who already have an opinion of the su, whether it be that its owrth working with or that its usueless, but the usuless opinion is based on expierence and not just blinde assumption.

Andrew 83

Awayindahils wrote:

More realistic goals need to be set if the union is to achieve anything. A break down yes, so that we can know what is going on with our money. Thats a good idea and essential so that we can build other campians around that. Having gotten this break down of fees, there then should be an absolute stand off over anywhere the college attempts ot bring in fees which are covered by the registration fee.

after that the exams campain has been brilliant, it makes the union look good, the students are pleased with it. its a good solid campian which can be sustained for years.

This is what I'm talking about. As I say a breakdown is provided every year and last year it showed the college were intentionally underfunding the Health Service.

On another note I hope people haven't forgotten that the SU fought for ages and bought and got the couches in the Arts Block and Hamilton. It wasn't the best when there was only red boxes.

Agent Smith

The couches are great...

(are there any down the science end?)

I have deleted my earlier post.
Joe

ApeXaviour

agent smith wrote:

The couches are great...

(are there any down the science end?)

Yes, 6 I think. If you go in the panoz entrance of the hamilton building, there's circular stairs infront of you that lead up to them.

Andrew 83

Andrew 83 wrote:

This is what I'm talking about. As I say a breakdown is provided every year and last year it showed the college were intentionally underfunding the Health Service.

We've actually received a breakdown of the breakdown of the last number of years, for items like Exams, Registration fee etc, but I haven't seen this years yet though.

MissSunshine

I asked a quite simple question. "What's wrong with the SU?" But your responses have been more to do with what's wrong with me or my posts.

Okay so, let's talk about what's wrong with the union. To be honest though i think most of what's been said here so far has been relevant to that topic.

Cuckoo mentioned the registration fee campaignand i have to say i agree with her wholeheartedly. In fact i'd go so far as to say she was far too resatrained in her comments, it was, without question, one of the most ineffective, useless and unfocused campaigns i've seen in all my years here and a monumental waste of cash too. It couldn't have been less effective had John just lit a bonfire in front square and burnt the money spent on those ridiculous fliers.

Next the health centre, i know most of us here are in agreement on this one but while we're on the subject of "what's wrong with the union..." i feel it's important to bring it up here again. When the health centre thing came to light it brought to light many of the problems with our union (specifically the union this year). First off, because they were quite unaware of the work that the union has done on this in previous years at least two of our sabbats kinda bought the "it's under funded, therefore it's best for the students if we charge them" line that college have always been spewing on this one. Granted when the topic was discussed at exec it would appear from Donal's lengthy minutes (what an interesting source they've proven to be) that the other sabbats were willing to come back to planet realism on this one.

However the manner in which the subject has been dealt with since then is appalling. There was nothing in the Record or on the website to the effect of "the union WILL fight college to oppose such charges etc etc.."
i have heard that the president was opposed to making such a move in fear of being seen as a "kneejerk" reaction, but realistically Steph's comment to TN was a major public screw-up (like the girl or not she should never have said that to TN) and as a result there are students in this college who now think that the union isn't prepared to fight college in defence of the services we already have never mind fighting them for improved or new services and that's not good enough. Mannion should've swallowed his "i don't want it to look like thay know more than me and my officers" pride and done his job on this one.

Finally what's happened since that famous meeting?

That's a genuine question cos i don't know.
I haven't seen a protest, or even another petiton, about it.
I haven't been updated on it through the weekly email, the Record, tcdsu.org or anyone's officer report....

And that ladies and gentlemen is the key problem with the union this year, communication (or a lack thereof).
Despite Mannion's "i'm the big cheese i'll wander around campus in my hoodie shaking hands with people" attitude, i don't think our union has ever been so out of touch with the students ("average" or otherwise).

Agent Smith

I'd put 100 euro on who the above post was by.

Joe

Nietzschean

uh i'm getting well sick of all this SU crap, any opposition to just locking any su related thread for a while so we can get back to our normal talk about ****é ?

Andrew 83

Nietzschean wrote:

uh i'm getting well sick of all this SU crap, any opposition to just locking any su related thread for a while so we can get back to our normal talk about ****é ?

I don't think there's any need to do that seeing as it hasn't spilled over into any other topics. Let the discussion reach its natural conclusion, everyone who isn't interested can just ignore it.