UCCSU Equality Officer Elections '10/'11

Hi all,

My name's Luke Field, and I'm running for SU Equality Officer in the elections on October 13th and 14th. I've already announced this in a number of other channels, including Forum UCC, but I decided to post it here as well because Forum UCC has a smaller user base and I wanted to give a wider audience the chance to read my manifesto and ask me questions.

The manifesto can be read here: http://bit.ly/eomanifesto

Thanks for your time, looking forward to the feedback!

Luke.

ReacherCreature

That's an interesting, well put together manifesto. I like your ideas. I'll give you a vote if I'm around to do so.

Cheers Reacher, thanks very much for the positive feedback! From the looks of things it's going to be an online election so you should be able to vote from the comfort of your own keyboard

ReacherCreature

All the better so! Good luck with it.

Argh, just got a call from the SU earlier to say that voting won't be online after all; it's going to be old-fashioned paper ballots… to say I'm disappointed is a bit of an understatement

We're still on for the 13th and 14th of October though.

Arts, Celtic Studies and Social Sciences will be voting in Boole Basement.
Business and Law will be voting in the ORB.
Science, Engineering and Food Science will be voting in the Kane.
Medicine and Health will be voting in Brookfield.

lilmissprincess

Great contender (from what I've heard) for Gender Equality Officer, Audrey Walsh. Second Year Arts Student who from the looks of things (her presence at Activist Academy and continued activism as class rep and in the SU) would do an awesome job. I've always found her very approachable and her manifesto looks great. Vote Audrey Walsh #1 for Gender Equality Officer

http://audreywalshforgenderequality.blogspot.com/

invinciblePRSTV

What's this Gender Equality lark about? something to do with there being unequal numbers of Females compared to Males in higher education?

Ah right just read your wans manifesto there. tbh i don't think it's a major issue over what genitalia student politicos have, and i am not a fan of funded campaigns trying to tell me what or what not to say.

Do the Drink Aware signs in the library stop me from boozing? no, no they do not.

deisedude

Are these new positions? i've never heard of an equality officer before

lilmissprincess

Equality SubOfficers Elected tonight
Gender Equality - Audrey Walsh
Disability - Antonia Virovska
Mature Student - Gary Mulcahy
LGBTRO - Laura Harmon
International student - Patrick Whyte

Congrats to all and best of luck to both contenders for Equality Officer.

Max001

If there are so many people falling over themselves to support an equality agenda at UCC, I wonder why the SU rejected the application of the Mind Matters group to set-up as an SU society? The tiny bit of respect I had for the SU evaporated at that point.

x43r0

Max001 wrote: »

If there are so many people falling over themselves to support an equality agenda at UCC, I wonder why the SU rejected the application of the Mind Matters group to set-up as an SU society? The tiny bit of respect I had for the SU evaporated at that point.

The SU didn't reject mind matters, the Societies Guild did.

Separate entities


Besides, mind matters would fall closer to a welfare remit than an equality one

lilmissprincess

Congratulations to Dave Carey, the new Equality Officer of UCCSU. Comiserations to Luke Field.

It was a very good election, run with no catfights or bitchiness which is always good to see.

Final Tally 858, with 1 spoiled vote.

Max001

x43r0 wrote: »

The SU didn't reject mind matters, the Societies Guild did.

Separate entities


Besides, mind matters would fall closer to a welfare remit than an equality one

Fair point and I stand corrected, however you can see how I might confuse the two as there appears to be the same level of 'competence'. Until discrimination in UCC towards those experiencing mental health 'issues' stops, its very much an equality issue!

Buceph

Max001 wrote: »

Fair point and I stand corrected, however you can see how I might confuse the two as there appears to be the same level of 'competence'. Until discrimination in UCC towards those experiencing mental health 'issues' stops, its very much an equality issue!

What discrimination?

deisedude

Buceph wrote: »

What discrimination?

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

Buceph

deisedude wrote: »

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

It's complete bull****. Their attitude seems to be that Students' Union is better than the students and need to educate all us boorish louts on how to behave. I don't know when it started, but the RAG week renaming was when I noticed how insulting their opinion of the average students became. And the student anti-fun brigade that'll call the police on you? What a joke? The behaviour during RAG Week and Fresher's Week must have become significantly worse since I was talking to the Guards who liaise with UCC or else a fast one has been pulled.


And this rubbish about a 100% increase in the registration fee coming from a front bencher in the government? (Although if you read the e-mail that the SU president sent out it isn't exactly what's said, just implied by a series of increasingly sensationalist sentences that all begin with a claim that the USI has been told something by a government front bencher that has let them figure out a devious plan by the Gubberment.) I'm sure if a front bencher was willing to tell anyone that kind of information the media would have picked up on it a long time ago. I think that strikes very much of partisanship on behalf of the personal beliefs of the SU and not of the realities of the situation.

And I certainly don't remember voting in favour of "mass mobilisation" of the UCC worker's proletariat (eh sorry) I mean the UCC Students Union. Although I wouldn't be surprised if we continue to see equally inflammatory pieces like this in the future. What we're seeing is a return to the amatuer student politics of shouting and yelling and "mass mobilisation" of the student army that was the bane of USI for a long time, which UCC strongly rallied aganst for a number of years. And of course they're basing this all on what happened two years ago, when the bust hadn't gotten into full swing. And no-one cares. Everyone is just happy to ignore them and let them waste our money. And the Express is happy to report the same crap from them over and over again, and it's only been Motley that has said anything even slightly against the official line.

Plautus

I actually don't see the point in these positions at all. Isn't this part of the welfare officers job?

You're right, but jobs for the hacks is the M.O. of an S.U. where the president signs off every missive with 'Yours in Solidarity'. Seems that becoming president of your alma mater's union before making a stab at the USI presidency is the standard cursus honorum for future Labour Party TDs ...

As if we needed inflation of roles and competences within the (already quite ineffectual) apparatus at a time when cutbacks are set to diminish resources spent on students even further.

The only good thing that can be said for the SU is that it's better than no union at all.

Max001

Plautus wrote: »

The only good thing that can be said for the SU is that it's better than no union at all.

You got me thinking. If someone were to start an 'alternative' union, I'd actively support it I've never witnessed a worse run or more inneffectual union than UCC's. (I was previously at Manchester (Victoria) & QUB) That its based in a tiny building at the ass end of the UCC site says it all really.

x43r0

samf

Max001 wrote: »

You got me thinking. If someone were to start an 'alternative' union, I'd actively support it I've never witnessed a worse run or more inneffectual union than UCC's. (I was previously at Manchester (Victoria) & QUB) That its based in a tiny building at the ass end of the UCC site says it all really.

You got me thinking. If i'm not mistaken you posted the following at the end of last term:

I have taken on a project within UCC, that will benefit many students and is within my capabilities. It will be planned, executed and regularly reviewed, with lessons learned made public, because ultimately, while its starting small in the autumn, one aim is to become a model of best practice over the three years I'm going to commit to it.

its a bit sensitive until its launched, which is tentatively planned for the first week of next term. Theres a lot of planning to be done over the summer and at this point I'd not have any detail other than a project outline.

When you see a new 'body' launched within UCC during the first week of next term, its value and purpose will be obvious. Once launched, it'll be absolutely transparent.

Sorry I can't say more for the moment.

So Max001 - since this is now a month into the new term of UCC where is this carefully planned project?? Surely with your incredible experience and competence this project has been a huge success... yet funnily enough I must admit that I dont know of any new 'body' that has lunched this year?

I mean surely if you're in such a position to criticise UCC's Students Union this year then this new body that you've set up has been a roaring success?

Plautus

That hardly invalidates criticism of the union now does it. The fact is that it's frequently a resting ground for political hacks and luvvies who make wildly unrealistic promises during election time while neglecting to tell anyone that they have shag all bargaining power and at the end of the day it's what the Academic Council and Governing Body decide on as best practice that gets done. Whenever the SU scores a 'success' it's been due to externalities (Green pressure on government to put a moratorium on discussion of fees) or fait accompli with college authorities. Case in point being printing - when UCC wants it, it gets it because it is in ultimate control of disbursement of monies.

Don't get me wrong, organising student balls and distributing condoms is work that needs to be done but the luvvies aren't half sickening. Reducing the price of food in the college restaurants always means a reduction in quality yet it seems to have been latched onto as a 'vote getter.' Proposing (as one education officer did in previous years) that he would seek accreditation from the college for society work was pure bananas. Only in recent times has the education officer shown some cop-on with regard to the obvious limitations of the position. The student paper is a properly unreadable shambles and has been for some time. Various 'awareness' campaigns don't achieve much and have dubious value. The actual work of the welfare officer viz. 'case work' is always a sacred cow (the talking points seem to settle on it occupying 90% of the officer's time and being 'harrowing') but I've never seen it properly interrogated/analysed. Their lack of practical qualification means they're nothing more than a clearing house for referring complaints to competent professionals in the DSS and Student Health and Counselling.

As it should be, but they shouldn't then be claiming they're something they're not. And preferably not selling us bull**** about 'solidarity' and scaremongering about the Browne report in the UK to suit their own ends. There's a reason that a certain person's weekly e-mail is now being routed to my trash can.

Max001

Not that I owe you any explanations 'Samf', but since you ask....I threw my lot in with Mind Matters whose plans were more advanced than my own. Sadly, the Guild saw fit to reject Mind Matters application for Society status and now won't state publicly why. You'll forgive my cynicism in the face of silly secrecy by children. End of.

x43r0

Plautus wrote: »

Proposing (as one education officer did in previous years) that he would seek accreditation from the college for society work was pure bananas

That happened. Society involvement is accredited. It's a 5-credit module

Plautus

I can find no evidence of this in either the book of modules or on collegeroad.ie - link?

And certainly it wasn't in place in 2009/2010.

daithilinnane

Hey guys,

Daithi Linnane here, Deputy President of the Students' Union. Just wanted to clear up a few things.

Up until this year the issue of equality was dealt with by the Welfare Officer. Unfortunately, due to the workload of this officer, between sitting on 25 or so committees, dealing with casework...etc, equality has often been left slip to the side. A non-sabbatical Equality Officer, as well as a group of sub-officers was seen as the easiest, most cost-effective and most appropriate way of dealing with this. Now there is an officer, who is only concerned with this issue, and a tam of sub-officers who will have more time and energy to devote to it then the workload of the Welfare Officer allowed. As well as this, students who have issues in this area will have a much easier way of figuring out who to contact, and will have someone who can devote far more resources to their issues then in the past.

On the workload of the Welfare Officer. Casework is a major part, and yes, while the Officer does not have any formal qualifications, they recieve training and guidance from a vast array of organisations and professionals. While part of their job is to refer people to other departments, there is often a lot of work which can go into a specific case. For example, due to the change in the economy over the past few years, financial casework has increased massively. Depending on the case the officer may have to attend meetings, liase with County/City Councils, represent the student to any number of committees or organisations...etc. This can be and usually is a time consuming but worthwhile process. As well as this, there is a lot of planning which goes into campaigns and other initititives run by the University and the Students' Union.

As for the value of the SU itself. I think that it is a valuable organisation that is integral to the University, but then again, I'm hardly the most impartial person in this instance. I will however give you a run down on how some of what we do works, and let you make your mind up for yourself.

Yes, Governing Body and Academic Council make some of the most important decisions about the University. However, the SU has 3 seats on GB, and 16 on AC. We are part of the decision making. While we do not always get our way, the University consults the SU as much as possible for two reasons. Contrary to popular belief the University does care about student opinions, but much of their decisions are already made for them due to government sanctioned cutbacks. Secondly, they know what type of a headache they will get if they don't consult students, for example, the Conferring Fee debacle in April 2010. As well as these two committees, the SU is represented on almost every committee in the college, and we are working to get representation on the ones we currently don't attend.

As for mass mobilisation, there was a referendum held in 2009 on this matter. It was overwhelmingly passed and read as follows:

UCC Students' Union Referendum From 2009

Section E

UCC Students' Union Adopts the following policy:
1. To adopt an approach of mass campaigning and mobilisation to defeat the threat of third level fees.
2. To organise a one day (24 hour) shutdown of the college as a warning to the government in advance of the cabinent meeting which will decide which will decide on fees. This shutdown should consist of a mass student strike with protests and activities on campus against fees. The Union should strive to get the active support of the staff and their unions for this action. The Union should campaign within the USI for our shutdown to be artof a national co-ordinated one day shutdown
3. To create a working group of students, class representatives and Students' Union Officers, open to all students and staff in order to accomplish the above.

Thats what the students asked us to do, and that is what we are doing. Last week SU officers from around the country met with all 166 TDs in Dail Eireann, as well as the Senators, and it was quite clear that the cuts coming down the line will be put with an unfair weight on the 3rd level sector, and in order to cover those cuts, students will be made make a larger contribution. Unless we challenge it. Ever sector of society facing cuts will want to change this, and as the saying goes, 'those who shout the loudest get cut the least'. And thats what we intend to do. The USI and SUs around the country have adopted a strategy of mass mobilisation and targeted lobbying in order to achieve this. As you mentioned, it was the Green Party who took fees off the agenda, but this was driven by targeted lobbying from SUs, particularly TCDSU and UCDSU's former Presidents Conan O'Brion and Gary Remond, who are now the Deputy President and President of the USI respectively. What we are doing works, and we intend to continue it, because that is what students have asked us to do.

On a few other points.

As a previous poster said, the Mind Matters society proposal was rejected by the Societies Guild, not the SU.

The Express and Motley are editorially independent, we do not run them.

An extra-curricular accreditation module is currently being trialled by the University, contact education@uccsu.ie for more details.

RAG week was renamed after consultation with the University, the Gardai and local residents. This was not done to control students, but to remind them what this was about, raising money, not causing havoc. The Student Patrol has been an extremely successful programme, once I get to my officer computer on Monday morning I'll get the statistics on the differences between R&G 2010 and previous years. For the record, the Patrol was not set up to 'call the gaurds' on students, but to act as an intermediary so that students wouldn't have to have their issues brought to that high a level.

On a final note, our jobs do have limitations, but we try our best to do whats best for our students. I for one always appreciate feedback and constructive criticism, but it isn't something we get enough of. While I'm all for online boards, its much easier to get through to us with direct contact. If anybody here, or anywhere in the University has any issues they want to talk about or anything they would like to see changed or done better, contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie, 0863836795 or arrange a meeting and come to my office, i would be more than happy to discuss anything with you. Hope that cleared a few things up.

Thanks,

Daithi Linnane

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

You got me thinking. If i'm not mistaken you posted the following at the end of last term:

That post, and the one preceding it by x43r0, are indicative of the chronic level of discussion about the Students' Union within UCC. If you voice any concerns about the Students' Union you are put in the "SU Hater" file-drawer, which then, apparently, allows everyone to ignore you. Character assassination is also quite frequent. Here samf choose not to deal with the actual point, but instead delivered an ad hominem attack on Max001's person.

I have some very legitimate concerns about the Student's Union. I feel they do not represent me. I disagree with their political campaigns, and the way in which they conduct those campaigns. Yet even though I'm a fee-paying member of the Union, my views are apparently irrelevant. When I voice them I am labelled an "SU Hater". And then the same people will often turn around and ask "why do people hate the SU?". There's a lot to be said for self-reflection.

daithilinnane

I don't consider anybody who criticises or raises questions about the Union to be an SU Hater, but as Campaigns Manager for the SU I have yet to receive any formal complaints about what we do. Feel free to contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie or 0863836795 and we can discuss whatever concerns you may have, I'm sure they are important and I would be happy to talk to you about them.

samf

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

That post, and the one preceding it by x43r0, are indicative of the chronic level of discussion about the Students' Union within UCC. If you voice any concerns about the Students' Union you are put in the "SU Hater" file-drawer, which then, apparently, allows everyone to ignore you. Character assassination is also quite frequent. Here samf choose not to deal with the actual point, but instead delivered an ad hominem attack on Max001's person.

I have some very legitimate concerns about the Student's Union. I feel they do not represent me. I disagree with their political campaigns, and the way in which they conduct those campaigns. Yet even though I'm a fee-paying member of the Union, my views are apparently irrelevant. When I voice them I am labelled an "SU Hater". And then the same people will often turn around and ask "why do people hate the SU?". There's a lot to be said for self-reflection.

Welcome to the conversation and congratulations on missing my point completely. The reason I bought that up is because if you'll remember last year Max001 bought this up in comparison to what an awful job I had done with the SU (funnily enough I dont remember you defending me back then):

Samf, unlike you, I have taken on a project within UCC, that will benefit many students and is within my capabilities. It will be planned, executed and regularly reviewed, with lessons learned made public, because ultimately, while its starting small in the autumn, one aim is to become a model of best practice over the three years I'm going to commit to it.

Sound like a familiar scenario Samf? No, I didn't think so.

I ask with good intentions what has since been done about this project and the answer is nothing. Will I post everyday about how incompetent he is for not doing it? will I patronise/lecture him like he did and like he did with his:

Try the 6 P's Samf. Prior Preparation Prevents Piss Poor Performance!

No. Cos if he actually tried to do something good that he believes in and thinks might improve things then fair enough, we're all only human, and mere students at the end of the day.

The sooner people realise that arguing about things like this achieves nothing and going out and doing something is what gets results then you might all be happier in your time in UCC.

I've no connection with the SU this year but my argument remains the same, if you dont like them, their policies, what they do, or the way they do it, dont sit on your ass and complain - do something about it!

Goddamnit, lads and lassies, this thread has gone a million miles off-topic now! If you want to fill up a thread with abusive comments aimed at UCCSU, at least start your own thread for that purpose…

As an ON-TOPIC point, thank you to everyone who supported my unsuccessful campaign for Equality Officer, especially those boards.ie members who took the time to read about my ideas. Best of luck to Dave Carey in his new role, and also to his Committee.

Also, thanks to everyone from UCCSU who took the time to post on this thread and answer questions about the position, and to the incredibly unbiased and impartial ( ) lilmissprincess for posting some stats.

Eliot Rosewater

samf wrote: »

Welcome to the conversation and congratulations on missing my point completely.

Your point is irrelevant because you were merely using it as a way of undermining Max001 without addressing the actual content of his post. It was an unabashed ad hominem post. It had absolutely nothing to do with the content of Max001's post.

samf wrote: »

(funnily enough I dont remember you defending me back then)

Once again, the character assassination. You're trying to disprove my position by attacking my person. It's a terribly lame debating tactic, and one that most people can see through, I'm afraid.

Buceph

daithilinnane wrote: »

Hey guys,

Daithi Linnane here, Deputy President of the Students' Union. Just wanted to clear up a few things.

Up until this year the issue of equality was dealt with by the Welfare Officer. Unfortunately, due to the workload of this officer, between sitting on 25 or so committees, dealing with casework...etc, equality has often been left slip to the side. A non-sabbatical Equality Officer, as well as a group of sub-officers was seen as the easiest, most cost-effective and most appropriate way of dealing with this. Now there is an officer, who is only concerned with this issue, and a tam of sub-officers who will have more time and energy to devote to it then the workload of the Welfare Officer allowed. As well as this, students who have issues in this area will have a much easier way of figuring out who to contact, and will have someone who can devote far more resources to their issues then in the past.

People aren't questioning the workloads of officers, people are questioning the very need for an equality officer. Some claim it's more jobs for the boys, others claim it's following personal beliefs of union officers, but the base of it is that people don't see the need for any equality officers. It's playing to the few who vote in the elections and not the vast majority who feel the Union don't represent them.

On the workload of the Welfare Officer. Casework is a major part, and yes, while the Officer does not have any formal qualifications, they recieve training and guidance from a vast array of organisations and professionals. While part of their job is to refer people to other departments, there is often a lot of work which can go into a specific case. For example, due to the change in the economy over the past few years, financial casework has increased massively.

So spend your time getting UCC to appoint someone who is qualified to advise on that. Not a student who thinks they know better than their peers.

Depending on the case the officer may have to attend meetings, liase with County/City Councils, represent the student to any number of committees or organisations...etc. This can be and usually is a time consuming but worthwhile process. As well as this, there is a lot of planning which goes into campaigns and other initititives run by the University and the Students' Union.

Book a bouncey castle and get someone to make up a poster? Yeah, a huge amount of work. Although there is loving it up with the USI if they've organised a mental health speaker.

As for the value of the SU itself. I think that it is a valuable organisation that is integral to the University, but then again, I'm hardly the most impartial person in this instance. I will however give you a run down on how some of what we do works, and let you make your mind up for yourself.

Yes, Governing Body and Academic Council make some of the most important decisions about the University. However, the SU has 3 seats on GB, and 16 on AC. We are part of the decision making. While we do not always get our way, the University consults the SU as much as possible for two reasons. Contrary to popular belief the University does care about student opinions, but much of their decisions are already made for them due to government sanctioned cutbacks. Secondly, they know what type of a headache they will get if they don't consult students, for example, the Conferring Fee debacle in April 2010.

I knew about the conferring fees long before the Union sent out an e-mail, and I would put the crawlback on the Uni's behalf down to the huge amount of people on facebook who said they would refuse to turn up if there were fees. A genuine question here, was it the SU who set up that facebook group? Because that was one of the most effective things I've seen in years.

As for mass mobilisation, there was a referendum held in 2009 on this matter. It was overwhelmingly passed and read as follows:

UCC Students' Union Referendum From 2009

Section E

UCC Students' Union Adopts the following policy:
1. To adopt an approach of mass campaigning and mobilisation to defeat the threat of third level fees.
2. To organise a one day (24 hour) shutdown of the college as a warning to the government in advance of the cabinent meeting which will decide which will decide on fees. This shutdown should consist of a mass student strike with protests and activities on campus against fees. The Union should strive to get the active support of the staff and their unions for this action. The Union should campaign within the USI for our shutdown to be artof a national co-ordinated one day shutdown
3. To create a working group of students, class representatives and Students' Union Officers, open to all students and staff in order to accomplish the above.

Thats what the students asked us to do,

No. That's what a small percentage of the college who ticked a box un-caringly acqueiesced to. The Union does not have a mandate. And I remember that vote, the people on campus for that lied through their teeth on what it would mean. I brought up UCCs campaigning to have USI be a more political lobby group rather than an activist group and was told that that's what this vote meant.

and that is what we are doing. Last week SU officers from around the country met with all 166 TDs in Dail Eireann, as well as the Senators, and it was quite clear that the cuts coming down the line will be put with an unfair weight on the 3rd level sector, and in order to cover those cuts, students will be made make a larger contribution. Unless we challenge it. Ever sector of society facing cuts will want to change this, and as the saying goes, 'those who shout the loudest get cut the least'. And thats what we intend to do. The USI and SUs around the country have adopted a strategy of mass mobilisation and targeted lobbying in order to achieve this. As you mentioned, it was the Green Party who took fees off the agenda, but this was driven by targeted lobbying from SUs, particularly TCDSU and UCDSU's former Presidents Conan O'Brion and Gary Remond, who are now the Deputy President and President of the USI respectively. What we are doing works, and we intend to continue it, because that is what students have asked us to do.

Eh, again you speak of a non-existent mandate. As for the Greens... The Greens have been against third level fees for a lot longer than those two SU people were their respective university's presidents. And it was quite prescient of them to know the Greens would be in government after Trevor Sargent swore blind they wouldn't be doing that. I do hope it's not the greens who USI are lobbying now.

As a previous poster said, the Mind Matters society proposal was rejected by the Societies Guild, not the SU.

How did the SU representative on the Guild vote then?

The Express and Motley are editorially independent, we do not run them.

A huge amount of funding for them is allocated through the SU budget though. Has their ever been a push for the UCC student media to have true independence?

An extra-curricular accreditation module is currently being trialled by the University, contact education@uccsu.ie for more details.

Are you serious? Lets get this straight, because the question was about getting credits for being involved in Societies. Which was proposed by someone who was involved in every society under the sun and who wanted kudos for that. Now you're saying that people are actively taking that seriously? Or are you talking about something else and obfuscating in response to a genuine concern?

RAG week was renamed after consultation with the University, the Gardai and local residents. This was not done to control students, but to remind them what this was about, raising money, not causing havoc. The Student Patrol has been an extremely successful programme, once I get to my officer computer on Monday morning I'll get the statistics on the differences between R&G 2010 and previous years. For the record, the Patrol was not set up to 'call the gaurds' on students, but to act as an intermediary so that students wouldn't have to have their issues brought to that high a level.

I'm sorry, but unless Rag week changed dramatically between 2005 and 2009 there was no "havoc." The guards were happy with the level of misbehaviour. And the only person with a problem with it was Neil Prendeville, a true friend of the common student.

And if you genuinely think Rag week was simply about raising money then you are truly deluded.

On a final note, our jobs do have limitations, but we try our best to do whats best for our students. I for one always appreciate feedback and constructive criticism, but it isn't something we get enough of. While I'm all for online boards, its much easier to get through to us with direct contact. If anybody here, or anywhere in the University has any issues they want to talk about or anything they would like to see changed or done better, contact me at deputy@uccsu.ie, 0863836795 or arrange a meeting and come to my office, i would be more than happy to discuss anything with you. Hope that cleared a few things up.

Thanks,

Daithi Linnane

Fair play for answering here. But I'd prefer things to be answered here where they can be examined and there's a record of them.