SU Hard to get in on

douglashyde

When I started this article, my initial point about the SU is that it is a very tight nit group, however after thinking about it, this isn’t the big issue and I have to agree with most of the comments, however,

The SU is a representative of DCU’s entire student body, including those who don’t participate – after all, we are all members without choice.

Now to say that the SU is NOT a tight group, is blind, it is human nature for this to happen. Now, to say that it is hard to get into this tight group is debatable, however what is clear is that the majority of the student body don’t WANT to get in/involved – WHY?

Perception – I think it is clear that the majority of the student body, who, the SU represent would have a perception of the SU that would equate to a negative sentiment score. (disclaimer: not my opinion of the SU).

So what’s to be done? Personal I believe that the promise’s made by candidates at elections are only made because you have to promise something. The only way to change perception is to overhaul the SU – or at least to be seen to overhaul the SU – to get these alienated view points of the SU to change and get these people on the SU’s side – the core perception of the SU needs changing.

Regarding the SPC, this is a separate issue - if the SPC's only role is to allocate funds, which I belive it does very well - then it is run brilliantally, however if it's role is also includes promoting social and club life within DCU, then it represent's ALL the Student Body, including those who never joined a club in their lifes. . .

MonaghanPenguin

douglashyde wrote: »

Regarding the SPC, this is a separate issue - if the SPC's only role is to allocate funds, which I belive it does very well - then it is run brilliantally, however if it's role is also includes promoting social and club life within DCU, then it represent's ALL the Student Body, including those who never joined a club in their lifes. . .

The SU stuff in a minute. But the SPC isn't there to promote social life in DCU and clubs are covered by the SCC. The SPC allocates money to Societies, it's up to each society then to promote their own social events. If the SPC allocates money and the society doesn't bother to organise the event it asked for then the money doesn't get spent. It's that simple

MonaghanPenguin

Ok, my experience in DCU:
When I arrived here I'd taken a few years out, so the majority of my friends from home were in final year. I spent all of first year not caring about the SU, Clubs, Societies, anything outside of my course and my mates. And I was very happy going to lectures, going back to theirs playing PES and going to Quinns.

Then in second year I became a class rep and got mildly involved with Debate Soc and another, small society. Outside of those two societies I doubt many people who have had a notion who I was other than maybe "that guy in Spar." Then at the end of that year I decided to run for the SU Exec. I never really thought I had a chance of winning but I wanted to give it a go. It was the same year Gizmo ran for President. There were four of us in that race, two people who would be considered to be part of the "clique" that people think it is, and two of us who were nothing like part of it. I ended up winning that election surprising a lot of people.

But from the moment I put my name forward those people who, at the time I must admit, I would have thought were part of this "clique" accepted me and made sure I never felt excluded. Just by running and showing interest I was taken in. A year later I was President. Now my best friends are all/were all on the SU exec or the SPC and even my girlfriend is on exec.

If the SU or SPC (this thread is a little messy because people don't seem to realise they aren't the same thing even if they work closely together) was this exclusive clique that never admited new people into it's ranks then both organisations would soon die out as people graduated and weren't replaced. And my journey through the ranks would not have been possible.

Is there a problem then? Yes, most certainly. Even if this clique doesn't exist, the perception that it does is there. People have gone on on this thread about people making empty promises at election time about being more open and accessible and then ignoring these promises when in office. Well honestly I defy you to come on here and say ANY President or other sabbatical officers have gone into their jobs and tried to close shop and ranks around them. No one who runs for these jobs does so planning to do a bad job. So what causes this perception of a clique? Well I think a few things.

1) Communication. If there was one thing I know let me down when I was President, it was communication. However, and this is something I believe runs through everything wrong (and there's much more right) about the SU, it's two-fold, no SU has found the perfect way to communicate with students I'll be the first to admit, but then again even if they did there are a lot of students out there who will ignore it either intentionally or because of apathy.

2) Human Nature as mentioned above. Simply by the nature of the job, the people I was always going to be closest to were Susan and Dave, after that Exec after that the people who got involved most. We spent SO much time together you're either going to be best friends or hate each other. And if you hate each other, you're not going to get anything done. Therefore when things work right you become tight-nit as a group of friends and people mistake this for being a clique because everyone becomes so close. We would have welcomed anyone who wanted to get involved to join that group and indeed as the year went on people did, but I get why to an outsider it might look impenetrable.

3) Maths. There are 11 SU Exec Officers in DCU. There are 10,000 students in DCU. Even if every exec officer befriended 100 different new people then you'd be barely over ten percent of the students in DCU. There's always going to be a certain feeling of distance from the Union the exact same as the population of Ireland is going to have a feeling of distance from the Dail.

4) Indifference. Last year the single biggest issue of the year? The bar. The second (and should have been biggest) fees. When every student was invited to numerous meetings or events about fees, how many showed up? When we held a Union Council where every student was invited to show up with suggestions or to vent their anger at me how many showed up? I think it's well known that I'm not a big fan of the college view but how many students actually bother to read it or Campus to find out what's going on and how many just walk past them not caring? What's the listenership for DCUFM?

I'm not saying SU Officers have been completely in the right, I'm not saying this wall of indifference has been completely in the wrong. But take it from someone who has been at the centre of this perceived "clique", when you try your best and throw so much effort into organising avenues for people to get involved, and no one shows up, it's hardly like you go away congratulating yourself that you've preserved the status quo for your mates.

monument

douglashyde wrote: »

Now to say that the SU is NOT a tight group, is blind, it is human nature for this to happen. Now, to say that it is hard to get into this tight group is debatable, however what is clear is that the majority of the student body don’t WANT to get in/involved – WHY?

Maybe apathy?

Grudaire

robby^5 wrote: »

It's not even enforced (which could be done by simply saying only 1 rep per soc at the start of a general meeting) which is a good thing. I think it's a much better way of voting to send more than one committee member from each soc as this way you have a consensus on who each soc will vote for as not everyone knows who will be running beforehand. Giving one person free reign to vote for whoever they like is just silly.

If this rule was enforced it would just impact further on attendance at general meetings, which usually start late or end up with people looking for representatives from socs because they cant get quorum. It's been like that the three times I've been there to vote for a new SPC.

Afaik it is enforced by the SCC (ie they look at the sign in sheet, kick out the lost society committee members, then only give out as many voting cards as there are clubs - simple but works)

A bigger complaint IMO is how late the grant app came out this year, beyond this I have no complaints with the SCC!

douglashyde

It’s not correct to put the student bodies’ lack of involvement down to apathy, because that is suggesting, they are not just not interested in SU and a college social life to begin with.

I think we can look at the clubs and societies as a good example of the large student base that do get involved in the college but not the students union.

And when we look at the perception of the SU that the student body has we can quickly realise that the problem isn’t empathy at all, it’s a view the student union are a “clicky” close group of “mates” – this perception is what I feel most of the student body has – however without proper research and sample sizes we cant be sure.

I agree about what you said about communication being a hard thing to master and human nature causing close relationships within groups, however this should not allow way for a negative perception of the SU.

Regarding the simple ratio difference to SU exec to student body size, surely to represent the entire student body, the resource should be there to contact on a personal level with every single student. – how many actually read their emails from the SU.
Otherwise what’s happening is that those with the loudest voice are the ones being represented. –It’s a union, not a political party.

Indifference among students is expected, not all students use the bar, not all students pay reg fees, not all students go to events.

If I where to sum up the prime goal of not just the student union, but any union for that matter, it would be to unite and represent all its members on all matters. DCUSU may cater to an extent for this to happen but do you honestly believe that’s what’s actually happening?

MonaghanPenguin

douglashyde wrote: »

It’s not correct to put the student bodies’ lack of involvement down to apathy, because that is suggesting, they are not just not interested in SU and a college social life to begin with.

I think we can look at the clubs and societies as a good example of the large student base that do get involved in the college but not the students union.

Ah now. Given that there are about 3000 memembers of Clubs and Socs each year, of these the vast majority are people involved in maybe one or two and just attend events in areas they are already involved in. The number of people who actually organise events is a lot smaller. The number of people who care about society life outside of their own interests is even smaller again. I'm not saying that all of these categories of people don't deserve credit for what they do, but lets not mistake ourselves that organising a poker game for your mates is the same as taking an active interest in the college or it's life.

douglashyde wrote: »

And when we look at the perception of the SU that the student body has we can quickly realise that the problem isn’t empathy at all, it’s a view the student union are a “clicky” close group of “mates” – this perception is what I feel most of the student body has – however without proper research and sample sizes we cant be sure.

I'm assuming you meant apathy and not empathy. I'm telling you now, anyone who wants to get involved in the SU can. Run for class rep, go to Union Council and stand up for what you believe in. If you don't think apathy isn't a problem (in Ireland, not just in DCU) then you need to take a look around you.

douglashyde wrote: »

I agree about what you said about communication being a hard thing to master and human nature causing close relationships within groups, however this should not allow way for a negative perception of the SU.

Regarding the simple ratio difference to SU exec to student body size, surely to represent the entire student body, the resource should be there to contact on a personal level with every single student. – how many actually read their emails from the SU.
Otherwise what’s happening is that those with the loudest voice are the ones being represented. –It’s a union, not a political party.

I'm not entirely sure what your point is here. Whether or not you're blaming people for not reading their emails. There are numerous ways for any student to contact an SU Officer, email adresses and phone numbers (For sabbats) are freely available, anyone is free to attend Union Council and every class is supposed to have at least two reps there anyways, how many classes care if their class rep shows up or not. The Sabbats have a completely open door policy too, the work I'm proudest of from my time is with individual students who came to the door with a problem that I helped them out with. If you want to contact any SU officer, do it right now, it's easy.

My point about the ratio in sizes was misunderstood. I didn't mean it was a barrier to communication, I meant it was impossible for SU Exec people to be friends with everyone and to have a personal relationship with every individual, therefore there was always going to be some level of disconnect no matter how hard you try.

douglashyde wrote: »

Indifference among students is expected, not all students use the bar, not all students pay reg fees, not all students go to events.

If I where to sum up the prime goal of not just the student union, but any union for that matter, it would be to unite and represent all its members on all matters. DCUSU may cater to an extent for this to happen but do you honestly believe that’s what’s actually happening?

These last two points contradict each other.

gizmo

douglashyde wrote: »

It’s not correct to put the student bodies’ lack of involvement down to apathy, because that is suggesting, they are not just not interested in SU and a college social life to begin with.

Unfortunately it is correct and it's definitely something you notice more the larger your involvement in extra curricular activities is. To give a few examples...

a) During the election campaign I was asked to hurry up during a brief talk to 4th years as, and I quote, "Why should we care about next year's SU if we're not even going to be here."

b) Upon asking different people had they voted, their replies included "Why should I?", "*laughs* No." and my very favourite "What's in it for me?".

c) Being asked by my room mate why I was bothering going to "another one of those society meetings" on the usual day. This was despite me being Chair of said society.

d) Hearing complaints from people about "those bloody SU emails" despite the fact that they were infrequent and filled with info on various events and reminders of services available to the student body.

douglashyde wrote: »

I think we can look at the clubs and societies as a good example of the large student base that do get involved in the college but not the students union.

Yes but those C&S fulfill a very specific role to solely their membership. Working as part of the SU means doing stuff which benefits the entire college, it means having a certain level of responsibility for their welfare (if you don't understand this then you don't understand the role of the SU, period) and it means taking a year out of your life to do the job. While involvement in C&S is good training for this kind of role it's still a totally different ballgame.

douglashyde

MonaghanPenguin wrote: »

Ah now. Given that there are about 3000 memembers of Clubs and Socs each year, of these the vast majority are people involved in maybe one or two and just attend events in areas they are already involved in. The number of people who actually organise events is a lot smaller. The number of people who care about society life outside of their own interests is even smaller again. I'm not saying that all of these categories of people don't deserve credit for what they do, but lets not mistake ourselves that organising a poker game for your mates is the same as taking an active interest in the college or it's life.

I don't know if the poker game comment was a personal stab at me, but it was a low shot if it was, but let’s let it rest at that.

When you said that the majority of people are involved in one or two clubs, your right! However this majority is the student body, the student body the SU should represent!! . . . . that being said, this years SU has done a great job on closing the gap that's developed between the student body and SU in previous years.

Also when you mention 3000 people who join clubs and socs, this is 3000 people who show an initial interest in developing extra curricular activity within DCU – what is happening to cause these numbers to drop?

MonaghanPenguin wrote: »

I'm assuming you meant apathy and not empathy. I'm telling you now, anyone who wants to get involved in the SU can. Run for class rep, go to Union Council and stand up for what you believe in. If you don't think apathy isn't a problem (in Ireland, not just in DCU) then you need to take a look around you.

Yes, I meant apathy.

Yes anyone can get involved, but I wouldn’t say it’s an easy task unless you’re in a certain situation. But let’s forget that for a minute, let’s look at this;

Say your right and anyone can get involved with the SU with ease....only a small portion of students will WANT to get involved, but that’s not to say that they don’t want to be represented. At this moment I have no intention of running for any SU position however I’d certainly hope that I am a student am being represented by my SU. Let’s take an example, one that affects a large chunk of students:

Grievances with lectures/courses/timetables etc..... In these cases most students go to their class rep (a SU position as it stands). the class rep then goes to the lecturer and represents the student. But how many class reps actually report back to the SU or attend the Union Council - I know it to be a very low amount.

Now you might say that, if the problem is sorted then why bother going to the SU exec’s? Because students should be linked in with their Union. Because the Union should be aware of current academic problems and because the class rep is only the first in the chain of the SU.

MonaghanPenguin wrote: »

I'm not entirely sure what your point is here. Whether or not you're blaming people for not reading their emails. There are numerous ways for any student to contact an SU Officer, email adresses and phone numbers (For sabbats) are freely available, anyone is free to attend Union Council and every class is supposed to have at least two reps there anyways, how many classes care if their class rep shows up or not. The Sabbats have a completely open door policy too, the work I'm proudest of from my time is with individual students who came to the door with a problem that I helped them out with. If you want to contact any SU officer, do it right now, it's easy.

This touches on my last point, which said that DCUSU caters to represent the student body but does it that what is exactly happening?

What I meant here is that, the system is in place to contact and be contactable by the student body. None the less this does this contact actually happen? I would say no. I used the example of people reading their SU emails, why are people not reading them? My answer would be that they do not feel the SU is relevant to them. - If it’s not relevant, should it not be made relevant or get these people involved in issues, otherwise why bother letting these people pay for membership?

I know we are sort of going around in circles here and I don’t know how much more can be said on either of our sides, I certainly appreciate your points and, however please appreciate these comments have been the most park, mark, gizmo and Monahan penguin and me, all of which expect myself are ex or current SU /SPC members.

douglashyde

Regarding your first points, this is exactly my point, I would imagine that people don’t see the SU as important to them. That’s not to say that it is or isn’t. its just these people’s PERCEPTION of the SU…. Again as mentioned before in my other posts, this perception needs to be changed!!! How? I haven’t a clue.

My point about the Clubs and Socs was that people do have an interest with their college life. While this is not relevant to the SU, it still shows that people don’t just go to lecturers and go home, if people are tickled the right way, they will get involved.

And my core understanding of any union is to unite its members. And as brought up in another closed forum is that membership is compulsory so the entire student base should a united front – otherwise why charge membership.

I love DCU and would not go to any other college, I also think that the SU have done a brilliant job running events and dealing with major tasks, however I believe there is a core issue of isolation of the majority of the student base that exists.

I’m done writing on this thing for the day as its taking up way to much time.

gizmo

douglashyde wrote: »

Also when you mention 3000 people who join clubs and socs, this is 3000 people who show an initial interest in developing extra curricular activity within DCU – what is happening to cause these numbers to drop?

As I said in my previous post, that is because SU work can be seen as more "boring" than society work. For instance, why get involved in Games Soc? Because you like Games. What about Poker Soc? Because you like Poker. So what about the SU then?

douglashyde wrote: »

Say your right and anyone can get involved with the SU with ease....only a small portion of students will WANT to get involved, but that’s not to say that they don’t want to be represented. At this moment I have no intention of running for any SU position however I’d certainly hope that I am a student am being represented by my SU.

Again this has been covered, you are being represented, it's just that this level of representation does not require a headline every time the SU, for example, attend a meeting on your behalf. Likewise, personal issues which the SU deal with on behalf of the students will never be publicised either by the SU or the student themselves.

douglashyde wrote: »

Let’s take an example, one that affects a large chunk of students:

Grievances with lectures/courses/timetables etc..... In these cases most students go to their class rep (a SU position as it stands). the class rep then goes to the lecturer and represents the student. But how many class reps actually report back to the SU or attend the Union Council - I know it to be a very low amount.

This is a problem alright, however the SU cannot force reps to attend, it just wouldn't work. In that case the students themselves in the class should make sure their rep is attending and then if not, call for a new one to be elected.

douglashyde wrote: »

Now you might say that, if the problem is sorted then why bother going to the SU exec’s? Because students should be linked in with their Union. Because the Union should be aware of current academic problems and because the class rep is only the first in the chain of the SU.

Quite right, just because a class isn't having a specific issue does not mean they should refrain from going to UC. However, this relates to my previous point, the students should ensure that their elected representatives are attending so that they themselves are kept in the loop.

douglashyde wrote: »

What I meant here is that, the system is in place to contact and be contactable by the student body. None the less this does this contact actually happen? I would say no.

Do the majority of the students require one-to-one face time with the SU exec? No. However, do not mistake the majority for the entirety as I can assure you that on a day-to-day basis the exec help far more students than you realise, none of which you will ever hear about as they are personal issues.

douglashyde wrote: »

I used the example of people reading their SU emails, why are people not reading them? My answer would be that they do not feel the SU is relevant to them. - If it’s not relevant, should it not be made relevant or get these people involved in issues, otherwise why bother letting these people pay for membership?

It's not relevant to them until they have a problem. When that happens we'll see how much they'll appreciate them but just like everything else in life, people will always talk about or post about it when things go wrong or aren't working but are never as quick to report back when something goes well.

Shea O'Meara

MonaghanPenguin wrote: »

...People have gone on on this thread about people making empty promises at election time about being more open and accessible and then ignoring these promises when in office. Well honestly I defy you to come on here and say ANY President or other sabbatical officers have gone into their jobs and tried to close shop and ranks around them.

You've made some good points which I agree with, however I accept your challenge on the above.

It has happened that when anyone who let's say, is not involved directly or affiliated with the SU (in a society with an officer for example), makes a complaint or puts forward a criticism the wagons circle. Even if it is a valid non-mudslinging concern. By wagons circle I mean it ends up with one guy or girl against several, it begins to take on a sarky tone. I've seen this happen on here, on Life and at various speaking engagements.
If you want specifics of closed ranks regarding Sabbatical officers check the archives on life, although that particular Pres deleted most of them, (made an admission which should be up there still), then there was the Pres who was in talks with Ferdy for a job after term and the officers who slagged off a number of students for simply posing valid gripes such as 'what ever happened to the rip-off campaign?'. Most recently on a minor level, the whole 'bum chum' childishness. And people who worked on Campus, then had the cheek to slag it off in election speeches on how they'd improve it if elected. Also I know a guy went to the SU a couple of years back regarding an issue with a lecturer only to be told he's on his own. This is not the norm, but it happens.

Choc123

Three Questions: All Hypothetical
1) Are SU sabbaticals allowed to be reelected?
2) Are those who have served as sabbatical officers in the past (say 2 years ago) allowed to run again for the same or a different position?
3)What would people think if any of the two above actually happened. Do students think sabbatical officers should serve their year and then move on?

john.needham

Choc123 wrote: »

Three Questions: All Hypothetical
1) Are SU sabbaticals allowed to be reelected?
2) Are those who have served as sabbatical officers in the past (say 2 years ago) allowed to run again for the same or a different position?
3)What would people think if any of the two above actually happened. Do students think sabbatical officers should serve their year and then move on?

Yes they can run again, I believe it happened a good few years ago.

More here.

And that may be going slightly off topic for this thread.

gizmo

Indeed, all valid questions but please leave it for another thread.