Students must now pay to attend their own conferrings. Eh...what?

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Are you actually being serious? We pay a pittance for third level education in this country. €1,650 for a full year in University is nothing. Perhaps you should cast your sights abroad and see what happens there.

Careful who you speak for when you say "we pay a pittance". Here's a quote from an international student in UCC on yesterdays Irish times poll:

I'm an international student. I paid 31000 euros to UCC this year for tuition. In the past 5 years, our tuition has gone up every year (about 2000 a year), and I have paid a total of almost 150,000 euros to this school since I started my studies. I come from a very middle class background and have had to take out huge bank loans to pay for the cost. I know that that was my choice, but I do wonder where all this money is going if the school is short of 65 euros after I've given them 31k!

Not everyone is paying a pittance, UCC gets some huge funding from international students who have to pay full fee's, why should they have to pay a further €65??

And back to Rebel girl's point about UCC being careless with their finances, here's some more examples of UCC's careless spending:

Some figures for you: the top scale for a UK university professor is €85,000. Meantime in UCC, the top rate for a lecturer - which remember, is the most junior academic grade - is €83,344. Our lowest equals their top scale. Meantime, the top scale for a professor in UCC is a whopping €158,644.

Tell me Eliot, how can UCC justify these salaries?? It would be one thing if UCC were doing all they could to reduce costs dramatically around college and find outside funding but were left with no alternative but to charge a conferring fee, but this is clearly not the case. Whether trinity have the charge in place or not is irrelevant, and shouldnt be seen as an excuse to bring it to UCC. Different university, different students, different finances.

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

Careful who you speak for when you say "we pay a pittance".

I was obviously talking about the general non-fee paying population which makes up the vast majority in UCC. Of course a fairer system would be if Irish students paid a little of their fees too, in which case the international students wouldn't have to be saddled with more charges such as this one. But we all know what ye think of that...

The point still stands. Irish people pay comparatively little for third level education, yet they still seem to have some kind of complex that they're already paying loads.

Do you support rebel girls previous assertion that international students should pay full fees because, you know, they always have?

samf wrote: »

Whether trinity have the charge in place or not is irrelevant, and shouldnt be seen as an excuse to bring it to UCC. Different university, different students, different finances.

But yet what other universities pay their staff is, for some reason, relevant.

What a blatant double standard.

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

But yet what other universities pay their staff is, for some reason, relevant.

What a blatant double standard.

Not really, Trinity is one university in Ireland. Fine, if whether other universities have a graduation charge or not is actually so relevant then find a second one that has a graduation charge? Or are you suggesting that just because one university of all the universities in Ireland have it in place then its the standard? If we want to look at relevancy of other universities then how about we look at every other university in Ireland and see what they do.

Also, I notice with all the crying over double standards you never answered my question, lecturers in UCC being paid twice the standard rate of the UK, is this acceptable to you???

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Do you support rebel girls previous assertion that international students should pay full fees because, you know, they always have?

And in answer to your question yes - presumably they have to because the Irish government only pay the fees for irish born students. If other countries dont offer the same policy then thats just the way it is. And if international students got the same free 3rd level education that we're lucky enough to have then everyone in the world would want to study here and we probably would struggle to even be accepted to our own universities.

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

Or are you suggesting that just because one university of all the universities in Ireland have it in place then its the standard?

What I'm saying is that you're very keen to look at other Universities to effect criticism of UCC but very reluctant to do same when it will hurt your argument.

UCD also have a conferring charge which is included in the registration fee. Next years SU will be lobbying for the contents of UCC's registration fee to be made public, so an full and total comparison cant be made as yet.

So as it stands the top two Universities in Ireland have this fee. Shouldn't we be looking there for best practice?

samf wrote: »

Also, I notice with all the crying over double standards you never answered my question, lecturers in UCC being paid twice the standard rate of the UK, is this acceptable to you???

I don't presume to know the ins and outs of the lecturer market. I do know that UCC has to tender high sums to attract the kind of talented researchers it needs to excel as a University. I also know that the cost of living in the UK is significantly lower than here. But all this is merely speculation; I would have to do more research.

Of course in an ideal world all Universities would be run according to free market principles, and the onus would be on the University to run efficiently and profitably. But this is, also, opposed by the student body.

samf wrote: »

And in answer to your question yes

In that case you shouldn't pretend to sympathize with their financial arrangements.

rebel girl 15

samf wrote: »

And in answer to your question yes - presumably they have to because the Irish government only pay the fees for irish born students. If other countries dont offer the same policy then thats just the way it is. And if international students got the same free 3rd level education that we're lucky enough to have then everyone in the world would want to study here and we probably would struggle to even be accepted to our own universities.

I remember reading somewhere that the UCC President wants to increase the international students in UCC to 20-25% of the total student body, simply to increase revenue for the college. And I'm pretty sure that he was confident of doing so. Money making is the name of the game, a poster here last summer worked out that for every page printed in UCC by a student, the college are taking more that 65% of the fee into their pocket. Too lazy to try the opposite - cost cutting, easier to grab as much money as they can. In Irish law, Irish citizens are afforded a free education, not any other citizen

UCC lecturers being paid double the rate of the the UK lecturers is not surprising in the least. Yet the UK system is considered much better, wonder why?

As regards the fee, €200,000 seems a lot, is there any way that there can be savings made on that? Considering that the students already pay €80 already for the ceremony, putting another €65 on top is a lot. What is that €200k + being spent on?

Eliot, you have misquoted the context - I said I'd pay it if I knew what it was going towards - I also stated that "conferring fee" was too vague for me to accept. Bringing it in sneakily is wrong, telling the student body by email at a time when a lot of people were gone home - the 08 document on cost saving still not fully implemented (which did mention printing charges), a document which involved consultation from a number of stakeholders. There is so much wastage going on that until the student body or someone make a stance, it will continue.

At least Ryanair state the charge, that it is not sneakily brought in - best practise is VfM, not trying to shake every last cent out of students before they go out the gate, or seeing how much money that they get out of the students before the students put up a fight. Its about saving money, and tbh the college f**ked up in a huge number of ways. Seems easier to try and get money off the students than actually implementing all cost cutting measures. They took out a €7 million term loan from Barclays last year, where has that money gone? Is that €7 million loan included in the €13 million debt, or is it in fact €20 million of debt?

Best practise is about seeing what is going on world wide and implementing it - 1993 UK VfM, any smart person would have seen that and said that it was a good idea, takes a crises for us to realise it! Money well spent by Murphy and the other presidents, jetting around the world :rolleyes: €600,000 saved last year by examining the insurance, and getting the best price - would have paid for last years and this years ceremonies with a few bob left!

Even maglite, someone who is pro fees can see the way that this fee was sneakily brought in! Thats why people are so up in arms about it!

In a recent appearance in front of the Joint Oireachtas on Education, the seven presidents admitted that the increase in registration fee was basically a tuition fee in disguise.

TBH, I'm sick of arguing the point with someone who won't listen and accept that there is wastage in the system that could have saved the cost of the ceremony many times over. There are a huge number of alternatives than dumping another fee on the students, and these alternatives have not been exhausted. A little cost-cutting has been undertaken, but not enough - there is plenty that can be done. Talk about best practise, look at Cambridge looking at taking out bonds to fund buildings, Ivy League bonds etc.

Papa_Lazarou

I aint no fan of these fello's but thats for another thread ;p
Just said id post these up here. Taken from facebook.

At 1pm on Monday 12th April, we will launch a campaign against the new €65 graduation charge announced by UCC at the start of this month. Following on from this, signatures will be collected on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday during lunch hours on campus. This petition will be delivered to the UCC registrar on Wednesday following a public march of students through campus.


The college timed its announcement to coincide with the Easter holidays to minimise the student response and protest. Every effort must be made to ensure that students understand what has been announced and that an opportunity is given for students to voice their anger.

UCC must realise that they cannot charge students for everything. Already this year, registration fees were increased by 50% to a massive €1650, printing fees have been introduced and now the college wishes to charge people to attend their own graduation. Enough is enough. This decision cannot and will not be accepted by students.

We will be joined on Monday by Senator Jerry Buttimer who has branded the charge as “a disgrace”, and representatives from the UCC Students Union will be invited. Everyone is welcome to support the fight against this fee and the aim of this campaign is start a visible presence on campus against this levy.

With each passing day, the publicity and support for a reversal of this fee is growing, UCC must make a come down and reverse this unjustifiable charge immediately.

Spread the word on facebook and invite your friends.
Help to reverse the decision to charge a conferring fee!

Enough is Enough!

Link to a poster about whats happening next week against the fee


http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1178558881#!/photo.php?pid=30728284&o=all&op=1&view=all&subj=109628045738205&aid=-1&id=1355763278&fbid=1280836345099

Eliot Rosewater

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

Money making is the name of the game

So what? "Money making" private sector services trump government services by a country mile in terms of efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

Considering that the students already pay €80 already for the ceremony, putting another €65 on top is a lot.

I just cannot comprehend this argument. It's like going into a taxi at the end of a night, declaring that you've already spent €30 on drink and that charging anything for the taxi is thus unfair.

The perception appears to be that someone somewhere should be paying for ones mode of living. Paying x amount of money for a graduation ceremony is, in my opinion, unfair and thus the taxpayer should pay my tab.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

At least Ryanair state the charge, that it is not sneakily brought in

Yes they state the charge but it's clearly not going towards that. It doesn't cost €5 to process a Visa transaction. If you don't like it, don't get it.

Back to UCC, there are two possibilities:

1. The conferring fee is for the conferring, in which case you disagree with it because you feel you pay enough to non-UCC bodies for the conferring already.
2. The conferring fee is not for the conferring, in which case you disagree with it because you don't want to pay for the cost of your education.

So the point is really irrelevant.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

In a recent appearance in front of the Joint Oireachtas on Education, the seven presidents admitted that the increase in registration fee was basically a tuition fee in disguise.

Yes. The Irish Universities need more money to give tuition. They have to charge students for that. Hardly surprising.

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

TBH, I'm sick of arguing the point with someone who won't listen and accept that there is wastage in the system that could have saved the cost of the ceremony many times over.

As I said here and in other posts on the thread: "Getting better value for money should obviously be a goal of the university. But there are two rather large caveats: a) as an effectively Government run institution it naturally tends towards inefficiency and b) cost savings alone will not bring UCC to the levels I would like to see it go."

So I don't know why you're accusing me of not listening.

rebel girl 15

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

a) as an effectively Government run institution it naturally tends towards inefficiency and b) cost savings alone will not bring UCC to the levels I would like to see it go."

Read the Universities Act 1997

Section 14. (1)
14. (1) A university, in performing its functions shall—
(a) have the right and responsibility to preserve and promote the traditional principles of academic freedom in the conduct of its internal and external affairs, and
(b) be entitled to regulate its affairs in accordance with its independent ethos and traditions and the traditional principles of academic freedom, and in doing so it shall have regard to—….
(ii) the effective and efficient use of resources, and
(iii) its obligations as to public accountability…

Approx 25% of the income for UCC is state funding. Getting VfM should be the main priority of the college not seeing how much money that they can shake out of students. Cost savings alone made when VfM became best practise would have made UCC much closer to where you want it to be, rather than charging students now. I want students to fight this fee, because until the university take a look at themselves rather than looking for the easy way out, the college will never become anywhere close to where you and I want it to be. Until students refuse to be piggy banks to be broken open by the college, then there is no way that the university will look to get value for money. Its not just about the wastage, its about other forms of finance, of which there are many, but the university seem to think that the students are their source of finance, there to be tapped whenever needed

Your own department had been given huge advice to help make itself better for the students, but it was not followed - the financial advice was not followed and you as a student have suffered as a result through a cancelled tutorial.

The college are getting a nice cut of the €80 already! The suppliers are given the contract by the college, but how much are the college getting from it? They aren't giving the suppliers the contract for nothing! The college authorities don't see beyond themselves.

I wish the old and new SUs the best of luck in holding another ceremony.

robp

rebel girl 15 wrote: »

Read the Universities Act 1997



Approx 25% of the income for UCC is state funding. Getting VfM should be the main priority of the college not seeing how much money that they can shake out of students. Cost savings alone made when VfM became best practise would have made UCC much closer to where you want it to be, rather than charging students now. I want students to fight this fee, because until the university take a look at themselves rather than looking for the easy way out, the college will never become anywhere close to where you and I want it to be. .

Where did you find this figure of 25% state funding? The goal for 2012 outlined in the strategic plan was to increase non-Exchequer research funding to 30% of total research income. Is there enough reg fees, postgrad and exchange students to explain the rest? Clearly winning non-exchequer funding will need to be increasingly pushed in the coming years but this is a difficult task for a middle-tier university especially during global recession. Much broader reform will be needed but if UCC is still aiming for the world class rep contributions from students who can afford it will be an absolute unavoidable along with "innovative funding".

Slashing salaries wouldn't be sufficient. The claimed double salaries in Ireland is a red herring. The Irish professor salary mentioned was the highest grade of professor. Like wasn't compared with like. Nevertheless British academic positions aren't directly comparable, as UCC would have far fewer professors and academic staff then an equivalent British university.
British students pay their tuition fees back through loans so funding tends to be less of a problem.

Byron85

I don't agree with the introduction of the "fee", in principle, simply because there has been no breakdown of the "fee" itself and what precisely it will be used for.

On the other hand, Eliot has been effectively on the ball about the whole thing. Now things are getting completely and utterly out of hand and there's going to be a protest on Monday about it. A protest about €65. It's a farcical scenario people and what we have here are the usual politicos flexing and posturing just for the sake of some publicity. UCC is the laughing stock of the country. Good job.

Eliot Rosewater

T.W.H Byron wrote: »

I don't agree with the introduction of the "fee", in principle, simply because there has been no breakdown of the "fee" itself and what precisely it will be used for.

For what it's worth, I don't really agree with this kind of fee. You could call it a "backdoor" fee, I suppose. I think having a conferring fee is far from desirable. But as I see it the college is in a bind: it needs students to pay more for their education but it can't ask for normal tuition fee's because the majority of the student population will go out on strike, claiming it's entitlements and rights are being infringed.

Think about it this way: this conferring fee spread across a 4 year degree amounts to €16.25 a year. For this (dare I say, paltry) amount the college has been the recipient of a Facebook group, a petition, a co-ordinated media campaign and now a physical protest by YFG. Imagine if they tried to introduce normal fees. :eek:

Esse85

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

For what it's worth, I don't really agree with this kind of fee. You could call it a "backdoor" fee, I suppose. I think having a conferring fee is far from desirable. But as I see it the college is in a bind: it needs students to pay more for their education but it can't ask for normal tuition fee's because the majority of the student population will go out on strike, claiming it's entitlements and rights are being infringed.

Think about it this way: this conferring fee spread across a 4 year degree amounts to €16.25 a year. For this (dare I say, paltry) amount the college has been the recipient of a Facebook group, a petition, a co-ordinated media campaign and now a physical protest by YFG. Imagine if they tried to introduce normal fees. :eek:

And what about a person who's only in the college for 1 year as opposed to your €16.25 over 4 years?

Is it fair that they have to pay €65 to be conferred considering they were only there 1 year?

Eliot Rosewater

Esse85 wrote: »

Is it fair that they have to pay €65 to be conferred considering they were only there 1 year?

Exactly my point; it's undesirable. A better system would if students (particularly those in a position to) started to pay more of their own fee's. But given the protest here at €65, what would it be like for a couple of hundred, even thousand?

kingstapler

Manach wrote: »

To respond to the chocolate analogy that Mr.Rosewater used (and to get a bit of revision in), we are beyond the invitation to treat stage. In that the conferring was an implicitly free event when an average student started his/her initial studies for the degree course. By introducting the fee after this starting point the chocolate seller is basically asking for more after he has already been paid. (I hope I can write clearly that this in the exam )

Thats a very good point. They are effectively laying on charges that weren't stated when the 'customer' signed up for the 'service', so to speak. Its wrong and thats the way it is.

Anyone who has already started their course did so without being told they would have to pay a conferring fee, its very unfair to suddenyl land them with it.

Cantabile

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Think about it this way: this conferring fee spread across a 4 year degree amounts to €16.25 a year. For this (dare I say, paltry) amount the college has been the recipient of a Facebook group, a petition, a co-ordinated media campaign and now a physical protest by YFG. Imagine if they tried to introduce normal fees. :eek:

YFG are opposing this based on the way its being brought in- it IS backdoor fees!! The conferring should be covered in our registration fee and this is just a random tax to raise a bit of revenue for a college that has no transparency with what we pay them. For what YFG would think if they tried to bring in normal fees, i refer you to this my dear : http://www.finegael.org/upload/file/3rdway.pdf

Manach wrote: »

To respond to the chocolate analogy that Mr.Rosewater used (and to get a bit of revision in), we are beyond the invitation to treat stage. In that the conferring was an implicitly free event when an average student started his/her initial studies for the degree course. By introducting the fee after this starting point the chocolate seller is basically asking for more after he has already been paid. (I hope I can write clearly that this in the exam )

Good job.. and dead right! First year contract?

Papa_Lazarou wrote: »

I aint no fan of these fello's but thats for another thread ;p

We're lovely in YFG :P

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

What I'm saying is that you're very keen to look at other Universities to effect criticism of UCC but very reluctant to do same when it will hurt your argument.

Quite hypocritical considering you're happy to mention the fact that Trinity have the fee to help your argument, but fail to mention all the universities that dont. Imagine if it was the other way around and Trinity were the only university that didnt charge a conferring fee, while every other univerity in Ireland did, and I said oh look trinity dont have it therefore we shouldnt either, it wouldnt be a very good argument would it?

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

UCD also have a conferring charge which is included in the registration fee.

So wait, in UCD a fee for a student service is included in the registration charge, which is supposed to fund student services? well that sounds pretty sensible to me, I wonder why UCC didnt do that also to save them all this hassle? Perhaps its because they intend on increasing the reg fee regardless, but want this as an extra charge, in order to maximise the income to the university from students? I'd bet so.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I don't presume to know the ins and outs of the lecturer market. I do know that UCC has to tender high sums to attract the kind of talented researchers it needs to excel as a University. I also know that the cost of living in the UK is significantly lower than here. But all this is merely speculation; I would have to do more research.

Those excuses dont come close to justifying UCC's lecturers max pay being twice that of the UK. Its plain and simple carelessness with money, and its our conferring fee's that will be paying these salaries. Im betting the average UK university isn't riddled with debt either.

Tell me Eliot, if fee's were optional, as in students such as yourselves who think the university are so great that they deserve to cripple us with debt were given the chance to pay in full for their course, would you pay?? Or are you more the type that likes to talk about how every student should pay for their education but given the opportunity wouldnt pay??

T.W.H Byron wrote:

On the other hand, Eliot has been effectively on the ball about the whole thing. Now things are getting completely and utterly out of hand and there's going to be a protest on Monday about it.

So you're saying even if you feel strongly about something and wish to do something about it instead of sitting around arguing about it on the internet in the hope that you may actually make a difference, then you shouldnt protest?? I thought we lived in a state where people were free to protest about what they want?

T.W.H Byron wrote:

A protest about €65.

Well actually its more than that, as a student body thats €65 x 16000 students, which works out at over a million euro. Even if last years graduations did cost 200k and that couldnt be reduced by cutting costs (which it certainly could) where's the extra 800k going?? You dont think thats worthy of protesting?

On top of that as its been repeatedly said - its not just the 65 euro, its the principal of it and the manner it which its been introduced. If students are seen to accept it without any consequences to the university then it'll be seen as a successful method of university income and will most likely be the first in a series of student services that have to now be paid for (even though you've already paid the reg fee - €5 million of which is unaccounted for).

T.W.H Byron wrote:

UCC is the laughing stock of the country. Good job.

Im not sure why you would think that. From the Irish times poll 70% of the public voted against the charge being bought in, why then would they find it in any way funny that students would protest against its introduction??

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Think about it this way: this conferring fee spread across a 4 year degree amounts to €16.25 a year. For this (dare I say, paltry) amount the college has been the recipient of a Facebook group, a petition, a co-ordinated media campaign and now a physical protest by YFG. Imagine if they tried to introduce normal fees.

Eh... hows your memory? They did try to introduce normal fee's and there was a huge protest against it at the beginning of this year and the end of last year, im pretty sure you were giving out about the protests on these very boards??

samf

That said, best of luck to all who do attend this protest, I'm on placement so I wont make it, and while I support the idea I do get the impression YFG are half doing this as a YFG publicity stunt rather than because they're so much against the issue. For example Jerry Buttimer attending on Monday... now is he attending because he's so outraged at the fee or is he hoping for a nice picture of him in the echo protesting with the students? I wonder...

Byron85

samf wrote: »

That said, best of luck to all who do attend this protest, I'm on placement so I wont make it, and while I support the idea I do get the impression YFG are half doing this as a YFG publicity stunt rather than because they're so much against the issue. For example Jerry Buttimer attending on Monday... now is he attending because he's so outraged at the fee or is he hoping for a nice picture of him in the echo protesting with the students? I wonder...

That's my main problem with the protest.

robp

Tell me Eliot, if fee's were optional, as in students such as yourselves who think the university are so great that they deserve to cripple us with debt were given the chance to pay in full for their course, would you pay?? Or are you more the type that likes to talk about how every student should pay for their education but given the opportunity wouldnt pay?

Bear in mind the body organizing the upcoming protests on Monday and Tuesday (FG) support partial fees for those who can afford them. Partial fees are the norm internationally and a very reasonable solution to the funding crisis despite the ridiculous hyperbole of USI.

Well actually its more than that, as a student body thats €65 x 16000 students, which works out at over a million euro. Even if last years graduations did cost 200k and that couldnt be reduced by cutting costs (which it certainly could) where's the extra 800k going?? You dont think thats worthy of protesting?

The extra 800K? Its CONFERRING fee and hence is only paid only per a degree. Only 3-4000 students graduate per a year not 16000.

The motivation behind the protest is self interest; spurious and utterly short sighted . "No to minor charges" how could that motivate the tough but needed changes. Reform and greater efficiency would be reasonable goals. I do wonder how many students participants will chanting for that.

Esse85

robp wrote: »

Bear in mind the body organizing the upcoming protests on Monday and Tuesday (FG) support partial fees for those who can afford them. Partial fees are the norm internationally and a very reasonable solution to the funding crisis despite the ridiculous hyperbole of USI.


The extra 800K? Its CONFERRING fee and hence is only paid only per a degree. Only 3-4000 students graduate per a year not 16000.

The motivation behind the protest is self interest; spurious and utterly short sighted . "No to minor charges" how could that motivate the tough but needed changes. Reform and greater efficiency would be reasonable goals. I do wonder how many students participants will chanting for that.

And those that go on to do a masters will end up paying €130 in the space of a year. Thats before you even consider the price of the gown and the photos etc....

samf

robp wrote: »

The extra 800K? Its CONFERRING fee and hence is only paid only per a degree. Only 3-4000 students graduate per a year not 16000.

Aplogies, you're right. Its 260k per year, still a lot though.

robp

samf wrote: »

Aplogies, you're right. Its 260k per year, still a lot though.

Thanks for acknowledging that anyway Sam.
The sum breaks down to around 15-17,000 euro per a ceremony. The majority of which goes towards to catering and publishing. Noting the culture of waste in the Irish public sector there may well be a degree of carelessness in spending. Whether there is or not this year’s ceremonies will be frugal indeed and not least due to the 15 euro cut in catering already agreed. I wouldn’t take issue if the protests were about seek cost saving measure. Rather is seems to about “the increased of a degree cost without any gains”. Is it fair to expect universities to exist on a cloud while the standard of living in this country is dropping 10-12%. Surely priority should be given to the universities development and keeping third level accessible too all. Affordability isn’t the issue here. For most this debate is about the perceived expense of a degree and nothing more.

And those that go on to do a masters will end up paying €130 in the space of a year. Thats before you even consider the price of the gown and the photos etc....

Esse85 if you use twice the resources well then yes you should pay twice the price. Hardly a unreasonable arrangement

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

Quite hypocritical considering you're happy to mention the fact that Trinity have the fee to help your argument, but fail to mention all the universities that dont.

I dont know if any other University does or does not; I'm working off of the RTE article. Any way, do you think we should be following WIT or TCD? The choice is pretty obvious to me.

samf wrote: »

well that sounds pretty sensible to me, I wonder why UCC didnt do that also to save them all this hassle?

Because if they increased the reg fee all the students and its union would still moan about it.

samf wrote: »

Or are you more the type that likes to talk about how every student should pay for their education but given the opportunity wouldnt pay??

Yes, because the contribution of one student will fix the college. It's a structural issue, not an individualistic one.

Eliot Rosewater

The embarrassment goes international, as Time Magazine reports on the state of Universities in Europe. The start of the article quotes Hugh O'Sullivan of the USI, who rather cringely compares being a student in Ireland to suffering under a famine. He then says "The last thing you eat is your seeds," implying that the getting of an education is the priority of students over everything else.

Perhaps Mr O'Sullivan is different to most in this regard, because all I'm seeing is down here is people prioritizing their short term financial gain over the long term benefits of a better degree and a better University.

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I dont know if any other University does or does not; I'm working off of the RTE article. Any way, do you think we should be following WIT or TCD? The choice is pretty obvious to me.

i wouldn't necessarily disregard any university's policy's in ireland just because they're not TCD. Im sure if they could all get away with charging €65 euro graduation fee's they would, but TCD seem to be the only ones who got away with it.

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

Because if they increased the reg fee all the students and its union would still moan about it.

The reg fee is being increased each year, despite the Union's anger about it, and I promise you it'll go up again this summer, so that excuse just doesnt cut it.

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The embarrassment goes international, as Time Magazine reports on the state of Universities in Europe. The start of the article quotes Hugh O'Sullivan of the USI, who rather cringely compares being a student in Ireland to suffering under a famine. He then says "The last thing you eat is your seeds," implying that the getting of an education is the priority of students over everything else.

Perhaps Mr O'Sullivan is different to most in this regard, because all I'm seeing is down here is people prioritizing their short term financial gain over the long term benefits of a better degree and a better University.

Quite selective quoting there Eliot, funny how you failed to mention:

"I have heard from students who have lived on biscuits stolen from the chaplaincy in their college for a week, students who have lived in their cars for months," says Hugh Sullivan, education officer at the Union of Students in Ireland

But of course, who cares about the students that cannot afford to eat without stealing food, poor people obviously shouldnt be entitled to a degree if they cant afford to help pay off the university's debt, of which they are in no way responsible for...

Whats €65 to students like them? A hell of a lot more important than €65 to you or I.

PhatPiggins

Cantabile wrote: »

YFG are opposing this based on the way its being brought in- it IS backdoor fees!! The conferring should be covered in our registration fee and this is just a random tax to raise a bit of revenue for a college that has no transparency with what we pay them. For what YFG would think if they tried to bring in normal fees, i refer you to this my dear : http://www.finegael.org/upload/file/3rdway.pdf



Good job.. and dead right! First year contract?



We're lovely in YFG :P

I must admit that any time I hear YFG or YFF endlessly churn out the party doctrine I think of the Hitler Youth and Animal Farm(Orwell's version not the porn classic)

jonny ambition

PhatPiggins wrote: »

I must admit that any time I hear YFG or YFF endlessly churn out the party doctrine I think of the Hitler Youth and Animal Farm(Orwell's version not the porn classic)

Godwin's Law strikes again, this time about a conferring fee. :pac:

rebel girl 15

Email from the SU President this morning

UCC Students’ Union Briefing for Students on the Graduation Fee

UCC Students’ Union would like to inform it’s members what it has been doing and what it plans to do in relation to the Graduation Fee that University Management have said they intend to charge from April 1st 2010.

Background

In September 2009, members of the Students’ Union attended a meeting with the VP for External Relations (Mr. Éamonn Sweeney), the Registrar/Deputy President of the University (Prof. Paul Giller), the VP for the Student Experience (Mr. Con O’Brien) and the head of the Media & Communications department (Mr. Dick Hogan).

The Students’ Union were not informed in advance as to the agenda or subject of the meeting and when we arrived we were told the University Management Team (UMT) had decided to introduce an €80 charge, payable by each UCC student, to attend a graduation ceremony.

The Students’ Union questioned the rationale for the charge considering students already pay €1,650 per annum for student serivces. The SU also questioned what the fee would cover. We were informed that a significant portion would go towards covering catering expenses. The SU representatives suggested that this part of the ceremony be abandoned on the basis that most graduands and their families go for a meal after the ceremony. We were later informed that the elimination of catering expenses would bring the fee to €65.

Also, the Students’ Union requested that the income earned by the University from gown hire and photography should be taken into account when looking at the cost of the conferrings and that if a fee had to be charged that it should only be the shortfall between income and expenditure. The SU were later informed that income from the conferrings could not be taken into account when calculating the graduation fee because “it had already been allocated in the budget”.

The SU conveyed to University Management that the fee was unacceptable and would be a very bitter taste to students on their way out the door of the University.

Protest

The Students’ Unions of UCC and CIT held a protest through Cork City on 7 October 2010 to protest the financial burdens being placed unequally on students. Particularly highlighted was the introduction of graduation charges, as described by the following article which appeared in the Irish Examiner at the time: http://www.irishexaminer.com/world/students-protest-extra-conferring-charge-102854.html

Governing Body

The matter was also conveyed to the University’s Governing Body meeting of December 8th when the issue of conferring charges was raised by the President of the Students’ Union.

The Students’ Union President made the point that although it was a cause for celebration that the graduations would be in the 100th year for 2010, that it would be the first time in those 100 years that the students would be charged to attend them. The SU President then abstained from a vote on the budget.

Registration Fee

It became obvious during the course of informal discussions with students that the charge should realistically be coming from the registration charge, which has increased by €600 this year. The SU then initiated an investigation into how the registration fee was being spent, along with partner SU’s around the country and USI (Union of Students in Ireland).

The Students' Union also succeeded - for the first time ever - in getting a full and itemised breakdown of what the UCC €1,500 Registration Fee is being spent on.

This culminated in a hearing by the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Education and Science and after 12 years the Students’ Union has successfully gotten the University to implement the Framework for Good Practice - which allows for formal input from the SU into how the registration fee is spent. We are hoping to subsume the conferring fee into the registration charge after we eliminate some of the costs associated with the ceremonies.

Since the Announcement

Since the official announcement of the fee the outgoing and incoming SU Presidents have appeared and featured in media reports criticising the fee including the Irish Independent, Irish Examiner, Irish Times, Evening Echo, Cork Independent, 96fm, Red FM and RTE.

The outgoing officers have also been in contact with members of senior management in relation to the fee, including a request for a full breakdown of income and expenditure relating to the Graduation Ceremonies which we have been promised and expect to receive within the next week.

We have also encouraged students to email the department of Media & Communications to voice their opposition to the fee. We cannot stress how important it is that you do this as it is the only thing that makes the UCC bureaucrats mad; when their inboxes are filled with emails from angry students.

We have also supported, and will support any other political activism on this issue, the UCC branch of Young Fine Gael who have organised a series of events in opposition to the fee including a launch, petition and march (planned for Wednesday at the Main Rest at 1pm- see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ook5nPGmHZg).

Plan of Action Going Forward

The Students’ Union held an emergency meeting to develop a strategy to eliminate the Conferring Fee.

The Students' Union will meet with the VP responsible for the fee this week along with the head of the department charged with organising the graduation ceremonies, we will also meeting with the Student Centre General Manager and the VP for the Student Experience and the SU President will meet with the University President to discuss the fee and other issues later in the week.

We are planning to use our votes on the management board and board of directors of the Student Centre to remove any rent being charged to the University for the ceremonies (thus reducing the fee) and will also lobby the department of Media & Communications to send information relating to the graduation ceremony over email rather than sending it by post which is allegedly making up a significant portion of the €65 charge.

Our objective is to identify all costs (once provided with a breakdown) and eliminate them and thus eliminate the charge or reduce it to a level where it cannot be justified as an external charge to the registration fee.

Also included in the strategy:
- An appeal to all local representatives to voice their opposition to the fee directly to the President of the University.
- Asking every student to email a different person responsible for this fee each day through the facebook site to keep the pressure up
- We have a video giving students directions to the office of the VP responsible for introducing the charge and we would encourage meet with him
- We are planning a campaign to boycott the graduate association
- We will continue to raise the issue in the local and national media
- We have a student willing to take a test case against the university whom we will support
- Other measures which we can’t publicise because they’d ruin the surprise for the people targeted