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

AdMMM

Being honest, calling us one big union is a bit ambitious. Everybody's a member by default, most of whom don't even know what this means. Then there's the issue of class reps, many of whom are hastily "elected" within the first week of college with the promise of free entry to nightclubs being the primary (and often-times only) motivating factor in putting your name forward. The thought that union-wide decisions are made based on the votes of some of these characters is unsettling to say the least.

I personally consider the union to consist of those actively involved in it. Even at this favourable size, it's still woefully organised. When you start to introduce the entire student body into it's active membership then it's nothing short of a chaotic mess that no other union in the college should be worried about.

MitchKoobski

stick-dan wrote: »

I suggest a sit in. It would create a media frenzy, when was the last time or ever that you heard of a mass student sit in. These results are important for all years, more so for us, but dont forget everyone is entitled to and needs their results.

sit in sounds like an excellent idea, going public on feb 2nd would just be like an add on to what every student and maybe class rep is already passing on to their friends. something like a sit in would be making a statement.

stick-dan

and again we have students picking apart aspects of other student bodies such as the students union active members, etc.

Ya know what lads fair enough bicker away such small mindedness is just gonna make any attempt rendered useless. Ya know whatever. Some of us are trying whatever way we can to spring ideas, construct maybe helpful conversation and yet ye lot are coming on here picking holes in posts made by posters who are in the same boat and on the same side as you. I know a good few reps who didn't join to get free entry or never asked even for the damn card for it, so why bring it up. I know you didn't say every rep but you might as well have implied it.

You get really fed up coming into this forum some time, when people do try to make a topic interesting, or spring to ideas to the fore, individuals like to either bash the poster, bash a mod, bash the union, etc. F()ck any doubters to be honest, i never saw eye to eye with WITSU but i'm glad they are making an effort on this one. I don't agree even with the route they took with regard to what was voted for, but i'll support the decision. I'm a fourth year, i'll miss class, i'll protest/sit in/ shout/ make banners whatever. Whats the point in going to class and undermining any effort we make when it will only take a day(probably) when it will only serve to weaken our arguement and allow the dispute to go on longer. You'll be left without results longer if you leave it solely between the TUI and WIT. Would you like the possibility of no summer exams? Its an extremely unlikely possibility but it could happen. Would ye like that? Ah what's the point in even posting back, talking to an f'ing wall anyway.Why don't you lot undermining thoughts/ideas/efforts of your fellow students reevaluate yourselves.

Load of b0llix

alpha2zulu

stick-dan wrote: »

@ alpha 2 zulu - Man i've agreed with you on everything so far, but you have no right what so ever to argue or give out and talk to anyone or go public until such a time past february 2nd, the official latest time you can receive results. Right now, no results are late.

Fair enough, agreed.

suggest a sit in. It would create a media frenzy, when was the last time or ever that you heard of a mass student sit in.

Yeah that would be the business, other stuff could include say 24 hour fast to protest your anger and collect for Haiti in the process. Again its something the media would easily catch on to. Other stuff could be something like a rolling car protest around the college perimeter beeping as you go...might sound crazy but again its very photogenic if you get enough people involved. Apologies if they sound a bit barmy but as Dan said

I hold out very little respect for parades and protests and their effectiveness

Clano

AdMMM wrote: »

Being honest, calling us one big union is a bit ambitious. Everybody's a member by default, most of whom don't even know what this means. Then there's the issue of class reps, many of whom are hastily "elected" within the first week of college with the promise of free entry to nightclubs being the primary (and often-times only) motivating factor in putting your name forward. The thought that union-wide decisions are made based on the votes of some of these characters is unsettling to say the least.

I personally consider the union to consist of those actively involved in it. Even at this favourable size, it's still woefully organised. When you start to introduce the entire student body into it's active membership then it's nothing short of a chaotic mess that no other union in the college should be worried about.

+1 on that!!
I do understand we need to stand together but i wouldnt be confident that the decision of these class reps aforementioned would be the in the interest of the whole college, and i know before anyone mentions it there are a lot of reps at the meetings who do care and have the best interests but i cant imagine a class rep from 1st year only in the college the bones of five months could have the same motivation as a fourth year here 4 years

Sully

A sit-in/protest would achieve the same media attention. A protest would raise more public awareness. More public awareness is whats needed here as it lumps pressure onto both parties to get their ****e sorted.

Iv had other stuff on my mind so I have yet to think fully about this, so my suggestions are a little rough around the edges.

I would have thought that perhaps if the students refused to attend classes until the ****e was sorted it would have a much bigger impact. But, it would have to be a noticeable "strike" rather then just sitting in the canteen drinking coffee. If we are seen to be actively doing something by the media and public, it may help our case a bit better.

Clano

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Fair enough, agreed.


Yeah that would be the business, other stuff could include say 24 hour fast to protest your anger and collect for Haiti in the process. Again its something the media would easily catch on to. Other stuff culd be something like a rolling car protest around the college perimeter beeping as you go...might sound crazy but again its very photogenic if you get enough people involved. Apologies if they sound a bit barmy but as Dan said

hey i loves me food!!!!!:D:D

I was thinking of along the same wavelength as you. i thought blocking all entrances to the college and even some roads around it would be effective although the gaurds would probably get involved :pac:

alpha2zulu

Clano wrote: »

I was thinking of along the same wavelength as you. i thought blocking all entrances to the college and even some roads around it would be effective although the gaurds would probably get involved :pac:

Never heard of anybody getting a ticket for driving too slow....:D

hey i loves me food!!!!!:D:D

I know man, +1:D

stick-dan

My idea was to block the lecturering staff out of the college, barracade the entrances. Make it inaccessible. This would achieve not going to classes. I agree with Sully the more impact the better. No lecturer would pass a picket of thousands of students. Be there in numbers, be heard. The sit in could effectively become sitting on your asses in the canteen which is done a lot so it wouldn't achieve much.

Blocking roads, now thats not on :P

Clano

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Never heard of anybody getting a ticket for driving too slow....:D

no i meant blocking all major roads around the college., like stopping altogether!! and blocking entrances

Sully

Mod Note:
Have to put the mod hat on here folks, as standard across Boards.

Please refrain from using this forum, and Boards.ie, for the planning or co-operation of any illegal activities. Anything proposed here should be legal and not break any laws.

What you plan yourselves is your own business, but if its illegal/dodgy, keep it away from this forum!

Sully

Regards to block the college entrance - I am not sure this can be done in general. I would assume the college would require access, so we would need to allow anybody who is/requires to cross the picket to do so.

I would like to think, if someone chooses to do so, we respect them. I know I was afforded this during the strikes, as we were other students. We may not like it, but I think we should allow them anyway but carry on the protest/strike as normal. Its never easy crossing a picket.

stick-dan

Sully wrote: »

Regards to block the college entrance - I am not sure this can be done in general. I would assume the college would require access, so we would need to allow anybody who is/requires to cross the picket to do so.

I would like to think, if someone chooses to do so, we respect them. I know I was afforded this during the strikes, as we were other students. We may not like it, but I think we should allow them anyway but carry on the protest/strike as normal. Its never easy crossing a picket.

well if it was to be barricaded off, the college that is. It would have to be done better than the lecturers strike where there was a max of 10 people on the entrances at each time. We have a massive student base at our disposable, albeit some students wont participate, most would. We could have 100 students on each entrance easily. No lecturers no matter how hard skinned would cross 100 students at an entrance.

alpha2zulu

A driving go slow around the periemter roads beeping as we go, say from 430-530pm when our lecturer friends are trying to go home could definetly be part of the action and its all above board. The Cork road exit is almost as bad as this in the evnings anyway!

In terms of keeping the media entertained, one thing they always seem to latch to lately is facebook groups which is why its good to see its up to almost 150 members already...Not sure if the title is doing it any favours!

AdMMM

stick-dan wrote: »

and again we have students picking apart aspects of other student bodies such as the students union active members, etc.

Ya know what lads fair enough bicker away such small mindedness is just gonna make any attempt rendered useless. Ya know whatever. Some of us are trying whatever way we can to spring ideas, construct maybe helpful conversation and yet ye lot are coming on here picking holes in posts made by posters who are in the same boat and on the same side as you. I know a good few reps who didn't join to get free entry or never asked even for the damn card for it, so why bring it up. I know you didn't say every rep but you might as well have implied it.

You get really fed up coming into this forum some time, when people do try to make a topic interesting, or spring to ideas to the fore, individuals like to either bash the poster, bash a mod, bash the union, etc. F()ck any doubters to be honest, i never saw eye to eye with WITSU but i'm glad they are making an effort on this one. I don't agree even with the route they took with regard to what was voted for, but i'll support the decision. I'm a fourth year, i'll miss class, i'll protest/sit in/ shout/ make banners whatever. Whats the point in going to class and undermining any effort we make when it will only take a day(probably) when it will only serve to weaken our arguement and allow the dispute to go on longer. You'll be left without results longer if you leave it solely between the TUI and WIT. Would you like the possibility of no summer exams? Its an extremely unlikely possibility but it could happen. Would ye like that? Ah what's the point in even posting back, talking to an f'ing wall anyway.Why don't you lot undermining thoughts/ideas/efforts of your fellow students reevaluate yourselves.

Load of b0llix

I really think you need to read over my post again before jumping to conclusions.

stick-dan

It wasn't all aimed at you to be fair. You didn't help the matter by pointing out weak bits in our arguement by talking about how the union is formed in the first few weeks. Anyway back on track yeah, wasn't attacking you personally there are a number of posters here who are giving the impression of a void between the student body, in a time when we should be gathered together.

Clano

stick-dan wrote: »

It wasn't all aimed at you to be fair. You didn't help the matter by pointing out weak bits in our arguement by talking about how the union is formed in the first few weeks. Anyway back on track yeah, wasn't attacking you personally there are a number of posters here who are giving the impression of a void between the student body, in a time when we should be gathered together.

Its called a discussion pal, fair enough people dont agree with your point and find flaws in it, we all put up points and other people found faults in them, its all part of discussion, just because we didnt agree with your point or others for that fact, it dosent mean we're all against eachother we're all in the same boat. Stop taking it so personal

Sully

Ah lads, calm down and lets just move on. The whole "Union Rocks, Union Sucks" debate is not relevant to this topic. Create a new topic to express your love/hate for them if you want but the constant dragging them in here and bashing them is getting pathetic.

AdMMM

I'm not trying to enter into a "union rocks/union sucks" debate. I think it would be wise for the union to evaluate itself, know it's strengths and weaknesses and how best to appeal to their members.

A students union in itself has a difficult challenge by the nature of it's membership, the majority of whom are only members for at most 4 years while they're studying in college. A lot of students also just want to put their head down and get through college without being involved in activism of any sort and it's safe to say that a lot of students aren't active in the union or any of its activities.

On the other hand, a union like the TUI has lifetime members and don't have to constantly re-educate it's members over the issues it faces. I'd say an awful lot of WITSU resources are spent on training their class reps. Students also see college as a means to an end whereas members of TUI see college as their profession and a short-term dispute for them would be a long-term dispute for students (eg: the ASTI strikes in 2000).

The issue of class reps is a very real one. The way in which they are recruited should be looked at. I remember back in first year we had a committee member come in and ask us to quickly vote in a rep because they were a bit stuck for time. This was in the first few weeks of the semester when nobody really knew anybody so the person that was picked was the guy who had made the most people laugh at a session the night beforehand. You can't argue that this process isn't flawed. I think a system of voting for class reps in the beginning of semester two would work a bit better as the ideal candidate would become apparent over the course of the first few months i.e. an outspoken and questioning type rather than a comedian. It would also make union communication much easier. It's hard to reach class groups whose rep is inactive in union activities i.e. I wouldn't know what was going in the union if it wasn't for this forum.

I think some of the suggestions here about potential action are very promising but ultimately whether or not they are successful depends on the Student Union knowing it's strengths and playing to them and being able to motivate its often apathetic membership into action. We need to hurt reputation of the TUI, not of ourselves.

alpha2zulu

stick-dan wrote: »

there are a number of posters here who are giving the impression of a void between the student body, in a time when we should be gathered together.

The intention wasent to give the impression of a void, what I wrote was purely out of concern for the tactics which have been employed. The topic is hardly off limits in a discussion like this.

But anyway, as you say back on track. When it comes to how p***ed off the general student body is at how were being treated by the lecturers, theres no doubt were all gathered together on that. Should be a interesting week ahead! Theres a bigger fish to fry, and its got TUI written all over it...

alpha2zulu

AdMMM wrote: »

I think some of the suggestions here about potential action are very promising but ultimately whether or not they are successful depends on the Student Union knowing it's strengths and playing to them and being able to motivate its often apathetic membership into action.

Very true,think the figures for full time students are around 10000 and something like 1700 graduated this year. The worry is of course on this basis is it a case that only 1 in 5 students are actually majorly put out by this which if any demo was done or whatever its effectiveness could be limited. even amongst the 1700 final years theres probably going to be another quarter at least who arent too phased for whatever reason. Its different for something like the fees protest where everybody has a lot at stake. But anyway its something for WITSU to think about during the week.

alpha2zulu

A short piece on the dispute has appeared on the RTE website.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0127/waterford.html

WIT lecturers refuse to correct papers

Wednesday, 27 January 2010 16:51 </H1>Some lecturers at Waterford Institute of Technology are refusing to correct exam papers from last December.
They say WIT attempted to change an administrative error which saw them paid too much for the work.
The college says this is causing uncertainty about the timing of exam results for students who sat their exams and who would have been due to receive their results early next week.

With it having got out into the open, does it mean the hush hush policy is over so we can start contacting TD's , councillors etc? If we all continue to keep quiet its just going to hurt us because you can be sure the TUI wont be long getting their response in the public domain!
RTE dont seem to be in any doubt about who the guilty party are, the phrase

administrative error which saw them paid too much for the work

certainly wasent from a TUI press release!



EDIT: WLR website has quite a detailed piece on it aswell now:

Lecturers at WIT are refusing to correct christmas exam papers Last Updated Jan 2010
Lecturers at Waterford Institute of Technology are refusing to correct exam papers from last December after the college attempted to change an administrative error which saw them paid too much for the work.

Waterford Institute of Technology confirmed that industrial action is underway concerning the level of additional payments made to academic staff for correcting examination papers.

The college says this is causing uncertainty about the timing of exam results for students who are due to receive their results early next week.

The Institute is endeavouring to work through this issue with the TUI and says it would be inappropriate to comment further.

WLR FM news understands that the issue in dispute is not the general impact of government public sector pays cuts, but cuts WIT has instituted in the rates it pays for exam corrections.

Staff should have been paid a lower rate for end of Semester examinations when semesteriastion was introduced four years ago but instead continued to be paid higher end of year exam rates.

The college was instructed to change this anomaly by the Department of Education and in doing this sparked the current dispute.

The issue is causing increasing concern amoungst the student body and although WIT Students Union will not comment on the matter until the papers are due back to students on Tuesday, a meeting of class representatives is taking place on Monday.

The payment for exams is additional to academic staff's basic pay, which ranges from 39,000 to 49,000 for assistant lecturers, between 47,000 and 83,000 for lecturers and 74,000 and 104,000 for senior lecturers.

The matter has been referred to the Labour Relations Commission.

http://www.wlrfm.com/tabId/503/itemId/3588/Lecturers-at-WIT-are-refusing-to-correct-christmas.aspx

homolumo

there is so much incorrect information in this thread it is hard to believe.

wrt to the above WLR piece, chances are it came from Bance Nolan, WIT's PR people, it is strewn with misinformation

alpha2zulu

homolumo wrote: »

there is so much incorrect information in this thread it is hard to believe.

wrt to the above WLR piece, chances are it came from Bance Nolan, WIT's PR people, it is strewn with misinformation

Is it...because it looks pretty much bang on to me to be honest! I mean whats incorrect about:

The payment for exams is additional to academic staff's basic pay, which ranges from 39,000 to 49,000 for assistant lecturers, between 47,000 and 83,000 for lecturers and 74,000 and 104,000 for senior lecturers.

The only thing they forgot to mention is that those figures dont include the States contribution to their pensions..;)

homolumo

the following press release may clarify a few things and show why the WIT press release is strewn with errors.

“TUI Branch Call for an Independent Investigation of WIT Records”

Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) members today at Waterford Institute of Technology (WIT) overwhelmingly (84.3%) endorsed industrial action for WIT’s refusal to be bound by a nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The Branch members were stunned at the inaccurate press release issued by the Institute over the dispute while they were balloting. The Branch Officers call for an independent investigation of WIT records.

TUI Branch Secretary Kathleen Moore Walsh today said:

“WIT became the first institute of technology in the country to completely semesterise its courses five years ago. At that time WIT continued to pay lecturers the rate set by the Department of Education and Science back in 1990. In October 2009, without any information or consultation with the TUI Branch, WIT unilaterally slashed the exam marking rate it had customarily paid since semesterisation for exam marking performed in June and August 2009. In response to the retrospective cuts the TUI Branch filed a grievance under the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure, and in December 2009 WIT refused to honour the Grievance Procedure. Today the ballot for industrial action centered on WIT’s refusal to be bound by the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The ballot was overwhelmingly endorsed (84.3%).

Contrary to its statement that it is ‘endeavouring to work through the issue with the TUI,’ today WIT issued a press statement full of inaccuracies. If WIT received any instructions from the Department telling it to slash the exam marking fees in October 2009 it was never provided to the Branch. Branch efforts to secure copies of letters from the Department have been refused under FOI because the Department alleges that the issue is currently the subject of national negotiations. Further, the Branch has never received the notice of WIT’s unilateral referral to the Labour Relations Commission. At no time did lecturers refuse to mark the Christmas exams as stated.

Branch members have agreed not to turn in results, draft future exams, or mark future exams until WIT agrees to honour the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The lecturers regret that the students have been dragged into this dispute, but point out that when WIT rejected the agreed Grievance Procedure it jettisoned the protections afforded under the Grievance Procedure regarding exams.

‘What is truly amazing is that WIT has publically stated that due to an administrative error lecturers were overpaid for the past five year. What other administrative errors have been made allegedly, and what is the cost of such errors?’ WIT has told staff that cuts are necessary to a number of areas due to budget constraints. However, Branch efforts to get Management to cut back on non-essential services such as hospitality, the director’s office, advertising, consultants and PR have been ignored. The Branch Officers call for an independent investigation of WIT records.

Sully

homolumo wrote: »

the following press release may clarify a few things and show why the WIT press release is strewn with errors.

“TUI Branch Call for an Independent Investigation of WIT Records”

Teachers’ Union of Ireland (TUI) members today at Waterford Institute of Technology (WIT) overwhelmingly (84.3%) endorsed industrial action for WIT’s refusal to be bound by a nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The Branch members were stunned at the inaccurate press release issued by the Institute over the dispute while they were balloting. The Branch Officers call for an independent investigation of WIT records.

TUI Branch Secretary Kathleen Moore Walsh today said:

“WIT became the first institute of technology in the country to completely semesterise its courses five years ago. At that time WIT continued to pay lecturers the rate set by the Department of Education and Science back in 1990. In October 2009, without any information or consultation with the TUI Branch, WIT unilaterally slashed the exam marking rate it had customarily paid since semesterisation for exam marking performed in June and August 2009. In response to the retrospective cuts the TUI Branch filed a grievance under the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure, and in December 2009 WIT refused to honour the Grievance Procedure. Today the ballot for industrial action centered on WIT’s refusal to be bound by the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The ballot was overwhelmingly endorsed (84.3%).

Contrary to its statement that it is ‘endeavouring to work through the issue with the TUI,’ today WIT issued a press statement full of inaccuracies. If WIT received any instructions from the Department telling it to slash the exam marking fees in October 2009 it was never provided to the Branch. Branch efforts to secure copies of letters from the Department have been refused under FOI because the Department alleges that the issue is currently the subject of national negotiations. Further, the Branch has never received the notice of WIT’s unilateral referral to the Labour Relations Commission. At no time did lecturers refuse to mark the Christmas exams as stated.

Branch members have agreed not to turn in results, draft future exams, or mark future exams until WIT agrees to honour the nationally agreed Grievance Procedure. The lecturers regret that the students have been dragged into this dispute, but point out that when WIT rejected the agreed Grievance Procedure it jettisoned the protections afforded under the Grievance Procedure regarding exams.

‘What is truly amazing is that WIT has publically stated that due to an administrative error lecturers were overpaid for the past five year. What other administrative errors have been made allegedly, and what is the cost of such errors?’ WIT has told staff that cuts are necessary to a number of areas due to budget constraints. However, Branch efforts to get Management to cut back on non-essential services such as hospitality, the director’s office, advertising, consultants and PR have been ignored. The Branch Officers call for an independent investigation of WIT records.

The above is more or less what has been said in this thread, bar more detail. Can you please advise me where these inaccuracies are?

Sully

Its also worth nothing that somebody has removed every copy of the Campus Times, which covered this dispute in detail, from the Cork Road Campus including Students Union. I understand that the SU did not submit an article or have anything to do with the current article in an official capacity and I understand that the college (possibly the TUI also) were unhappy with Campus Times covering the story. But jesus, removing every copy in main campus seems OTT.

alpha2zulu

Sully wrote: »

The above is more or less what has been said in this thread, bar more detail. Can you please advise me where these inaccuracies are?

Well this is one for starters:

The lecturers regret that the students have been dragged into this dispute,

If dear Kathleen gave a monkeys about the students she would have tabled an exemption for 4th years...

Surprised by that 84% figure because half our lecturers have privately expressed to us their anger at the Unions latest shenanigans. Was the vote anonymous or a raised hands job I wonder...
I understand that the SU did not submit an article or have anything to do with the current article in an official capacity and I understand that the college (possibly the TUI also) were unhappy with Campus Times covering the story. But jesus, removing every copy in main campus seems OTT.

Thats rediculous, with RTE on the case the campus times is the least of their worries now...Bring on Duffers and Matt Cooper now!

Sully

alpha 2 zulu wrote: »

Surprised by that 84% figure because half our lecturers have privately expressed to us their anger at the Unions latest shenanigans. Was the vote anonymous or a raised hands job I wonder...

That figure could only represent a small group of people. It would need to be disclosed how many voted, rather then a percentage, to get an accurate idea of how lecturers felt. Also, not all are members of TUI.

shapez

Sully wrote: »

Its also worth nothing that somebody has removed every copy of the Campus Times, which covered this dispute in detail, from the Cork Road Campus including Students Union. I understand that the SU did not submit an article or have anything to do with the current article in an official capacity and I understand that the college (possibly the TUI also) were unhappy with Campus Times covering the story. But jesus, removing every copy in main campus seems OTT.

I beg to differ. I could have picked the Campus Times up anywhere in the Main Campus, IT Building, T&L Building in the last 2 days. In fact there are untouched bunches of the Campus Times in the common areas of the T&L Building & IT Building.