Exam Results - Delayed (Mod Warning: Post #383 & #420)

jonsey

beegirl wrote: »

---Quote (Originally by jonsey)---
When the mod of a forum makes comments that are so out of touch with the facts of a case then you know a thread is screwed.
---End Quote---


What happened to this post? Do any posts that you don't like just get deleted??? This isn't a forum it's a dictatorship :rolleyes:

I had deleted the post myself beegirl as I was going to re-phrase it and add to it but it got quoted before I could so no conspiracy theory on that front!

beegirl

jonsey wrote: »

I had deleted the post myself beegirl as I was going to re-phrase it and add to it but it got quoted before I could so no conspiracy theory on that front!

Oops!!! Sorry Sully, jumped to conclusions a bit quick there

Sully

jonsey wrote: »

I was referring to your earlier points on why the TUI didn't accept the deal before when there was no such deal before. Not a very clever comment to make. As for the grievance procedure, what is your point on that? Are you suggesting that the TUI should have dug their heels in and get full pay! Even if you were suggesting this as an option (not sure why you would) then it wouldn't work like that at all.

There was a deal - the exact same without using the procedure but going through LRC instead. If the Grievance Procedure was fully used to the point, then the lecturers get paid 100% until its resolved and technically speaking it could go on for another 5 years. The TUI lodged the dispute, they decided when to go to the LRC. Just one fault I see with this procedure

beegirl wrote: »

No, lecturers will be getting the 50% rate until such a time that a higher rate is agreed on (if it ever is!). That is the deal that was accepted so that we could end the industrial action. The whole point was to get back inside the grievance procedure so that TUI would be able to take this to the LRC, if it cannot be agreed on locally.

That works better for the college so, and I suppose students in respect. At least the TUI are getting some of their procedures respected.

jonsey

Sully wrote: »

There was a deal - the exact same without using the procedure but going through LRC instead. If the Grievance Procedure was fully used to the point, then the lecturers get paid 100% until its resolved and technically speaking it could go on for another 5 years. The TUI lodged the dispute, they decided when to go to the LRC. Just one fault I see with this procedure

Just to clarify - are you saying that the deal accepted yesterday is the same deal that was offered a few weeks ago? In a dispute like this you can't just decide to go to the LRC. If that was the case every union in Ireland would lodge complaints to the LRC when pay is cut in the hope of it dragging on for years. It simply does not work like that. As someone pointed out previously the LRC is a court of last resort. If the TUI had referred it then it would simply have been referred back to the two parties to try to come to an agreement locally so 100% would not have been paid.

Sully wrote: »

That works better for the college so, and I suppose students in respect. At least the TUI are getting some of their procedures respected.

It sure does work better for the college. That's spot on and it keeps us out of it.

thejanitor

Results have been submitted to the college and boards are due to take place over the next 2 week.

I would imagine results can be expected in late Feb.

alpha2zulu

beegirl wrote: »

There is good news folks! I'm sure you will probably hear this today anyway, but the dispute has been resolved at a meeting last night - so no more industrial action and lecturers will be submitting results ASAP.

Well we heard that yesterday, the meeting was always going to be a fore gone conclusion once the TUI heads were happy. Democracy-Iranian style...

By the way, the offer made by WIT was the EXACT same as the one TUI rejected a couple of weeks ago

Now on face value it really makes the whole episode look like a TUI power trip. The way I'm reading it is through it going back to the grievance procedure, albeit on the 50% exam pay rate, the TUI wanted something from the WIT that in someway vaguely resembles a carrot so that they can go back to their members and proclaim 'peace in our time'.

People were willing to accept any offer that got things back into proper negotiations

Hold on, which side actually brought the dispute outside proper negotiations in the first place. Did the WIT work outside the grievance procedure...yes, but they weren’t the ones that walked away with the green n' whites.

many expressed concern about what not accepting the offer (i.e. dragging things out further) would mean for students. So I hope that may put paid to the comments that it was all about the money and that lecturers didn't care about student welfare.

Nonsense,
Its worse than that, students werent held to ransom because of money, it was because of some almighty grievance procedure!!

I would never say our lecturers at any rate didn’t care about students welfare, but in my opinion the TUI shop stewards and negotiators blatantly showed no consideration for students welfare by forcing the rank and files members into this type of action. Anecdotal evidence suggests this form of action actually had very little support and it was the fear of the unions wrath that allowed the thing voted through in the first place. They had no right to use us effectively as a human shield in their internal dispute!

jonsey

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Now on face value it really makes the whole episode look like a TUI power trip. The way I'm reading it is through it going back to the grievance procedure, albeit on the 50% exam pay rate, the TUI wanted something from the WIT that in someway vaguely resembles a carrot so that they can go back to their members and proclaim 'peace in our time'.

On this face of it it would. However, you are ignoring a key fact - and you selectively only posted half of beegirl's point which was:

beegirl wrote: »

By the way, the offer made by WIT was the EXACT same as the one TUI rejected a couple of weeks ago - the only difference is that WIT has now agreed to negotiate further on the issue and get back within the grievance procedure.

The part in bold is what you have quoted but the second part is more important. The first offer was that WIT would pay 100% for exams already corrected but would not negotiate on future exams. The more recent offer was 100% for past exams and they would be willing to negotiate. The college are now willing to abide by the grievance procedure, whereas before they wouldn't. Can you not see the difference? It's quite an important one.

homolumo

the whole dispute became more than exam payments/money. lets face it no one is going to get rich on exam payments when tax, income levy etc are deducted. it was about respecting proper industrial relations and not taking unilateral action.

lugha

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

They had no right to use us effectively as a human shield in their internal dispute!

Interesting question as to whether this kind of action is morally justified and of course it is not unique to this dispute. Usually when workers engage in industrial action, people who have no part in the quarrel are the ones who have to pay the price, be they patients, commuters, electricity customers, or in this case students or whoever. You could argue that workers should only target their adversaries (i.e. management) but unfortunately, frequently the only option open to them is to withdraw/restrict their labour.
Rightly or wrongly, the consensus has emerged amongst workers that they do have a right to withdraw their labour. Those of you who seek, and hopefully find, rewarding employment will find that they have all sort of entitlements as workers (sick/maternity leave, minimum wage, holidays entitlements etc.) that the might not have if workers in the past had not fought for them.

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

it was because of some almighty grievance procedure!!

Of course the bad old days of regular strikes wasn't satisfactory for anybody and we have devised a more sensible way of dealing with the inevitable and perpetual conflict of interests between workers and their bosses. The grievance procedure that you dismiss with such disdain is part of this more civilized approach.
If both sides are not compelled to adhere to what they agree to (unless they have very good reason not to) then how can there even be a basis for any agreement? Surely it is an immutable rule of negotiation between any parties, no matter how much their views differ, that you abide by what you agree to? How can there be agreement unless there is mutual expectation that such agreement will be honoured?

alpha2zulu

jonsey wrote: »

The part in bold is what you have quoted but the second part is more important.

Well it depends on your perspective of course. The fact remains practically the same deal was on the table before. Whether it was the TUI national rep felt the joke had run its course or the local TUI heads were getting nerves about members breaking ranks I guess we'll never know.
The fact remains:

beegirl wrote: »

lecturers will be getting the 50% rate until such a time that a higher rate is agreed on (if it ever is!).

Peace in our time indeed!

lugha wrote: »

You could argue that workers should only target their adversaries (i.e. management) but unfortunately, frequently the only option open to them is to withdraw/restrict their labour.

Of course they should have targeted management. How dare they stick the students in the middle of it. Its just pure laziness on the part of the TUI that between the lot of them they couldent find a way of targeting management without stressing out and worrying innocent students. It was totally pathetic. The phrase more money than sense comes to mind....

lugha

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Of course they should have targeted management. How dare they stick the students in the middle of it. Its just pure laziness on the part of the TUI that between the lot of them they couldent find a way of targeting management without stressing out and worrying innocent students. It was totally pathetic. The phrase more money than sense comes to mind....

Well yes, management should be targeted, whenever that is possible. Unfortunately in practice workers do not usually have the option of targeting managers directly so they do the only thing they can do when managers try to pull a fast one, which is to withdraw their labour. (Can you suggest an alternative approach the TUI might have taken?) Do you seriously argue that workers should never withdraw labour if doing so were to cause difficulties for people who had no part in the dispute? It would certainly be a very honourable and ethical stance to take. It would also render the worker powerless which would mean them having to ensure most unpalatable working conditions if they were to have taken this approach in the past.
Unless you are gearing up for a career in management, I suggest that you will gain a lot more than you lose by virtue of the unwillingness of workers to be trampled on.

jonsey

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Well it depends on your perspective of course. The fact remains practically the same deal was on the table before.

That fact doesn't remain! How can you not see that? There is a huge difference that has already been explained in this thread and is quite simple to understand (one would imagine).

sparkling sea

It seems the TUI have ensured that a new precedent was not set. The status quo regarding any change in conditions remains the same

If the college wishes to make a change of any kind regarding lecturers working conditions they must follow the proper procedures.

I could be wrong but from I can tell it looks like a bad decision was made by the management originally. The interest of students who in some cases pay dearly for a service came second place. Nothings changed then.

fuzzy21

jonsey u really are an annoying twat! your just on this to try and prove every1 else wrong, well in fact your wrong...
its finished now, results will be out
what an idiot

Tom Dunne

fuzzy21 wrote: »

jonsey u really are an annoying twat! your just on this to try and prove every1 else wrong, well in fact your wrong...
its finished now, results will be out
what an idiot

If you have a point to make, please do not resort to petty insults and juvenile txt speak. Attack the post, not the poster.

If you do not heed my warning, you won't last long on this site.

jonsey

fuzzy21 wrote: »

jonsey u really are an annoying twat! your just on this to try and prove every1 else wrong, well in fact your wrong...
its finished now, results will be out
what an idiot

You're right, I'm a twat alright for putting forward my opinions! I'm not here to prove everyone wrong - just to argue with people who I feel are putting forward invalid points. Is that not the whole point of a board? Should only people who agree with your point of view be allowed. Very grown up of you to resort to just calling someone a twat as you obviously don't have the intelligence to make a proper counter-argument. Well done. You really look clever. Btw, your means belonging to you, you're means you are.

fuzzy21 wrote: »

83% of lectures voted for this. Some reprimand could have been made for final year students.

You may also want to check out the meaning of the word reprimand whilst you're calling someone an idiot.

Gadgie

jonsey wrote: »

Btw, your means belonging to you, you're means you are.

I'm glad someone finally said it! Some of the final-year students on this thread could improve their job prospects by brushing up on basic spelling and grammar whilst they're waiting for their results...

Sully

Mod Note:

Come on lads, lets not start getting down to correcting each others spelling mistakes - its a little pathetic. Lets keep the personal attacks away from Boards.

Thanks.

Gadgie

Sorry Sully, but I find it laughable that some students are complaining about being so disadvantaged by a lack of results when they're making basic spelling errors.

How do you think it looks to a prospective employer when they receive a CV or an application form from people who don't know the difference between your/you're and there/their/they're?

Sully

Gadgie wrote: »

Sorry Sully, but I find it laughable that some students are complaining about being so disadvantaged by a lack of results when they're making basic spelling errors.

How do you think it looks to a prospective employer when they receive a CV or an application form from people who don't know the difference between your/you're and there/their/they're?

Its completely irrelevant to this thread and is effectively trolling. There are many reasons for such mistakes, some of which may not apply on a CV/Application form etc. and some of which would be accepted.

But as I said - its not what this topic is about so lets keep on topic.

Thanks.

jonsey

Sully wrote: »

Mod Note:

Come on lads, lets not start getting down to correcting each others spelling mistakes - its a little pathetic. Lets keep the personal attacks away from Boards.

Thanks.

Apologies. I usually try to keep on topic but was just a tad annoyed at being called a twat and an idiot when I previously tried to refrain from personal insults and put forward what I thought were logical arguments.

Sully

jonsey wrote: »

Apologies. I usually try to keep on topic but was just a tad annoyed at being called a twat and an idiot when I previously tried to refrain from personal insults and put forward what I thought were logical arguments.

Understandable, it happens to the best of us. Just trying to prevent several others doing same and bringing the topic onto something entirely different.

jonsey

Sully wrote: »

Understandable, it happens to the best of us. Just trying to prevent several others doing same and bringing the topic onto something entirely different.

Understood. Maybe I'll start another thread on the standards of spelling and grammar to satisfy my pedantic needs

Clano

just after hearing a rumour the results wont be out until 4th of march???? anyone confirm this??

if its true its a disgrace! how does it take them that long?? i heard it should only take about 2 weeks from the day the green and whites go in.

This is another kick in the stones from the college i have 4 job application dates that i will miss if this is the case. I would actually never recommend anybody to come to wit!!!

MitchKoobski

Clano wrote: »

just after hearing a rumour the results wont be out until 4th of march???? anyone confirm this??

if its true its a disgrace! how does it take them that long?? i heard it should only take about 2 weeks from the day the green and whites go in.

This is another kick in the stones from the college i have 4 job application dates that i will miss if this is the case. I would actually never recommend anybody to come to wit!!!

Ive heard the same, between the 4th and the 10th.
apparently all the exam board meetings are on the week we come back from midterm and then it will take a week to put the results through.
don't see why they can't have the meetings this week or during the mid-term to make up for screwing us over already.

dlofnep

4th of march is the confirmed date.

jasmin ruby

One of my lecturers told my group this morning that the results would be out on the 4th of March and that she would not be taking our lecture tomorrow morning due to the fact that she would be at a board meeting about the results.Another lecturer told us the same thing later in the day.It's good that they are getting a move on with the exam board meetings but why does it have to take until the 4th of March.Really not fair on the 4th years.

Sully

My understanding is that there will be no board meetings next week due to it being Professional Development Week and I think the External Examiners may not have been available any earlier. So, there was some delays but that can be expected considering its not normally done around this time.

Until this is all done, the results are not "official". Once done, WIT will begin putting them into the system and getting them all online. So next week has been a bit of a hinder. I would assume some lecturers will let students know once they have been passed and made official. It just takes time to get them into the system and online as you can expect with so many results!

I am open to correction though.

Darragh

Hi all,

My name is Darragh and I'm the Boards.ie Ltd Communications Manager.

I've read this thread start to finish this evening and I'd just like to remind people of a couple of things:

1. You are not anonymous. Please don't write as if you are, because we can and will identify you on the foot of a court order or a section 8 request under the Data Protection Act. Certain WIT staff (if that's the correct term?) members are being named in this thread, while the commenters aren't naming themselves. Just be aware that there is a perception of imbalance in this, and don't think of your username as protection. You are still subject to the law.

2. You are posting in this forum under both our Terms of Use, our Guidelines and the forum charter. You are posting on our website and we expect you to follow our moderator's and site guidelines. There's no free speech here. Your cooperation in this matter is appreciated and is what makes Boards.ie successful.

3. We have legal guidelines on this site that everyone is expected to follow. We will not allow libellous or defamatory comments. We will not allow personal attacks on people and we will not condone attacks on someone's professional ability without direct evidence and facts being given. Insulting someone because you don't like them in not nice and it's not fair. You wouldn't like it to happen to you.

4. After reading this entire thread I am satisfied that the thread is being handled correctly by the moderators but I don't want to see any personal attacks, any off topic comments or anything that you wouldn't be prepared to say under your own name and with your address being attached.

I have already edited some words and posts that I felt were either off topic, abusive or didn't relate directly to the topic - I have not done this lightly and I have not done this under legal "threat" - I have done this to keep the thread on topic and relating to the matter. The actions I have taken are visible to the moderators.

5. I am aware that this thread is under discussion in WIT, with talk of legal action being put forward.

To date, we have not received any official communication about this. We have received communication from people who are unhappy with being insulted professionally and I have taken appropriate action on this. We welcome any clarifications on any issues raised in the thread to be emailed to us or, ideally, for representatives from all sides to register and engage on the thread.

Being honest, it would have been easier for me to just delete the thread, but in the interest of keeping the discussion intact, we have not done this. We are a site built on discussion and this is important. I am being very transparent here in what's happening and the action I am taking and I trust you will appreciate this.

Finally, if anyone has any comments or questions on how we are handling this thread, please feel free to put them below or email me at hello@boards.ie - I will get back to you in working hours as soon as possible.

Kind regards and thanks for your cooperation

Darragh

AdMMM

Looks like people are afraid to talk now!

It's great news that this finally seems to be settled though, for all parties involved.