Class Rep training junket?

LeixlipRed

Fair enough, I'd probably say it's less btw, I wasn't arguing it was larger. But this all about principle.

Is it right that the SU spends our money on frivolous rubbish like this trip when students are struggling to make ends meet? No.

Is it right that the SU exec have sanctioned this, while they, superficially at least, have been campaigning on the issue of student fees and grants? No.

Is it ever right that student's fees or any taxpayers money is spent on occasions like this? No.

westdub15

LeixlipRed wrote: »

One could be cynical, and this is just my own opinion and unrelated to the thread topic, that this has never been looked into in any meaningful way, i.e. no one in the SU actually cares about getting it sorted.

ye I know I was a bit off topic just getting p****d off about the SU wasting money on stuff like the junket when the 93 euro could go so far for the average student if spent wisely.

lordgoat

#occupynuimsu #occupyjunket ???

the_observer

Rob has sent us his official response, which we'll be posting in the next couple of minutes

the_observer

http://stobserver.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/msu-presidents-response-to-class-rep-training/

LeixlipRed

That's a long winded version of what he posted on here. The first half is a pathetic and barely veiled attack on the people who are trying to hold him to account. The rest is just rubbish. Still on for Monday, see you all there.

How so Joe

My question is minor, but... how six years of reps?
four year of undergrads + postgrad reps? Five years, surely?

Dr. Nguyen Van Falk

the_observer wrote: »

http://stobserver.wordpress.com/2011/10/08/msu-presidents-response-to-class-rep-training/

to sum up, DCU have good class rep system and they have it on their campus so in order for us to have a good class rep system we must do d opposite to them this is mindbogglingly stupid

Michellenman

Rob; from the article above.

I didn’t even know there was a Students’ Union until my final year

Didn't he run a failed campaign for VP comms and dev when he was in second year?

the_observer

If it goes ahead, we want someone there for the Observer to report on what's actually happening at the Junket, so if any class reps see this and fancy some investigative journalism, PM me,or email us: studentobserverireland@gmail.com

-Dave

LeixlipRed

Discussing this my housemate here after we've both read it. Rob has failed, that I can see, to address the principle of having a trip away to a hotel. He addresses the details, price, cost relative to other junket haven universities, etc,. But never once questions whether doing this is actual right or wrong. And that is a complete failure to understand the mindset of huge number of students, many who voted for him.

mickstupp

"We can’t have it on campus this year for the same reason that other colleges with many nearby amenities – shops, pubs, cafes – have theirs off campus. Too many people stay for the food and bed but leave during the modules." - That, in my opinion, is not a good argument for having it in a hotel. The type of people who would just show up for the freebies and then leave are, we can assume, the types we don't want. So make it very clear that anyone who leaves for longer than a toilet break will not be a class rep. Turfed out. Full stop. Done.

"For a college of our size, in our kind of setting, having it on campus will not work this year." I didn't see an explanation as to why... as far as I know the college has sports halls and large lecture theaters, certainly room enough to accommodate 120-140 people.

"The most popular person in the class might be great craic in The Roost, but is not going to hang around for 90 minutes on the 1997 Universities Act, internal university committee structure, standing university committees, etc." - Again... you tell them they stay there, and they stay awake, or they're turfed out. They either want the position or they don't. Still not seeing a reason for a funded hotel trip.

"We can’t have it on campus until we know that the people who signed up are serious about it, and we can’t trust that everyone is serious about it until the responsibilities of the job are widely known and only serious people go for it." So... you're saying you need bribery? Am I misreading it? Because that right there in that quote is still not a valid reason for a hotel trip. Make it clear beforehand that not taking part will not be tolerated. Don't judge them after the fact.

"Most hotels quoted us, and university Unions spend, in the region of 9K – 14K. We have the total cost of the training, not just the hotel, down to about 5K – we’ll have the full breakdown for everyone at Union Council. With a similar number of reps, we’re paying a little over a third of the average the cost of other colleges that do this for training, and we’re spending basically nothing on ‘party provisions’. We are careful with students’ money." Just because other people do it more expensively, and just because you got a 'low' quote, doesn't suddenly make it an acceptable price. Saying you're being careful with students' money doesn't suddenly make it true.

"We know from experience that the easiest way to make sure all your decisions are popular is to never make any decisions, and with almost no student representation in the past that line has been very easy to tow." Some people might consider that argument well and good if the alternative to this trip was no training. Then you could say, either we have no training, or expensive training. But that's not the actual alternative, there are other options, other decisions you could make. The argument is, in my opinion, irrelevant and misleading.

"nobody is poorer because of this training." - I'll grant you that, simply because we've all already handed over our money and what's done with it now is entirely out of our control it seems. Actually the 93 euro itself made me poorer, whatever you specifically do with the money isn't going to change that.

"That’s why this year we’ll be publishing detailed accounts of not just of this project but of every account the Students’ Union operates." - This bit, however, I certainly do applaud and appreciate. And I appreciate the time taken to try and explain your position. I for one just agree with very little of your opinion on the matter, or your analysis of what constitutes a valid reason to spend so much money.

And this: "We’re spending the smallest amount of money we can on a huge, vital project." is entirely untrue. The smallest amount of money you can spend is an awful lot less than what you are spending. I'm totally willing to believe I haven't a clue... but I can't see a single good reason in that whole thing as to why this money absolutely needs to be spent, or why there's somehow no alternative whatsoever.

I'm honestly confused, I never thought I'd be so angry about this but I am. There's literally not a single valid reason in this thing, other than some vague notion that if we don't do it this way, we won't be able to hold people's attention long enough to give them training. Well... if the only people you can get are those who need to be segregated just to get their focus, those are not the people I personally want representing me. I want people who want to be there. End of story. Not people who want to be there despite having to sit through boring modules and despite having to give up their weekend on a training thing and despite whatever else you can dream up.

And my apologies for the tone or any perceived offense. Mod away if it needs it.

the_observer

Michellenman wrote: »

Rob; from the article above.


Did he run a failed campaign for VP comms and dev when he was in second year?

I dunno if it was second year, but he did say in an interview with us prior to this year's election that he had run for VP comms a couple of years before. I'll check the interview on my hard drive and get back to you

LeixlipRed

mickstupp wrote: »

"We can’t have it on campus this year for the same reason that other colleges with many nearby amenities – shops, pubs, cafes – have theirs off campus. Too many people stay for the food and bed but leave during the modules." - That, in my opinion, is not a good argument for having it in a hotel. The type of people who would just show up for the freebies and then leave are, we can assume, the types we don't want. So make it very clear that anyone who leaves for longer than a toilet break will not be a class rep. Turfed out. Full stop. Done.

"For a college of our size, in our kind of setting, having it on campus will not work this year." I didn't see an explanation as to why... as far as I know the college has sports halls and large lecture theaters, certainly room enough to accommodate 120-140 people.

"The most popular person in the class might be great craic in The Roost, but is not going to hang around for 90 minutes on the 1997 Universities Act, internal university committee structure, standing university committees, etc." - Again... you tell them they stay there, and they stay awake, or they're turfed out. They either want the position or they don't. Still not seeing a reason for a funded hotel trip.

"We can’t have it on campus until we know that the people who signed up are serious about it, and we can’t trust that everyone is serious about it until the responsibilities of the job are widely known and only serious people go for it." So... you're saying you need bribery? Am I misreading it? Because that right there in that quote is still not a valid reason for a hotel trip. Make it clear beforehand that not taking part will not be tolerated. Don't judge them after the fact.

"Most hotels quoted us, and university Unions spend, in the region of 9K – 14K. We have the total cost of the training, not just the hotel, down to about 5K – we’ll have the full breakdown for everyone at Union Council. With a similar number of reps, we’re paying a little over a third of the average the cost of other colleges that do this for training, and we’re spending basically nothing on ‘party provisions’. We are careful with students’ money." Just because other people do it more expensively, and just because you got a 'low' quote, doesn't suddenly make it an acceptable price. Saying you're being careful with students' money doesn't suddenly make it true.

"We know from experience that the easiest way to make sure all your decisions are popular is to never make any decisions, and with almost no student representation in the past that line has been very easy to tow." Some people might consider that argument well and good if the alternative to this trip was no training. Then you could say, either we have no training, or expensive training. But that's not the actual alternative, there are other options, other decisions you could make. The argument is, in my opinion, irrelevant and misleading.

"nobody is poorer because of this training." - I'll grant you that, simply because we've all already handed over our money and what's done with it now is entirely out of our control it seems.

"That’s why this year we’ll be publishing detailed accounts of not just of this project but of every account the Students’ Union operates." - This bit, however, I certainly do applaud and appreciate. And I appreciate the time taken to try and explain your position. I for one just agree with very little of your opinion on the matter, or your analysis of what constitutes a valid reason to spend so much money.

And this: "We’re spending the smallest amount of money we can on a huge, vital project." is entirely untrue. The smallest amount of money you can spend is an awful lot less than what you are spending. I'm totally willing to believe I haven't a clue... but I can't see a single good reason in that whole thing as to why this money absolutely needs to be spent, or why there's somehow no alternative whatsoever.

I'm honestly confused, I never thought I'd be so angry about this but I am. There's literally not a single valid reason in this thing, other than some vague notion that if we don't do it this way, we won't be able to hold people's attention long enough to give them training. Well... if the only people you can get are those who need to be segregated just to get their focus, those are not the people I personally want representing me. I want people who want to be there. End of story. Not people who want to be there despite having to sit through boring modules and despite having to give up their weekend on a training thing and despite whatever else you can dream up.

And my apologies for the tone or any perceived offense. Mod away if it needs it.

You've done what I couldn't do, started typing something like this but got so bloody angry I nearly through my laptop off my bed. Brilliant post and picks apart what I consider to be just a complete load of dross.

Seren_

How so Joe wrote: »

My question is minor, but... how six years of reps?
four year of undergrads + postgrad reps? Five years, surely?

Different reps for Masters and PhD students I assume.

I know I'm probably going to get eaten for saying this, but I get where Rob is coming from in his response. Maynooth has absolutely no class rep system whatsoever, and whatever it takes needs to be done in order to get one up and running. I still don't agree with the view that it needs to be held in a hotel to work, but at least this isn't going to be a yearly thing like it is in the likes of UCD.

LeixlipRed

the_observer wrote: »

I dunno if it was second year, but he did say in an interview with us prior to this year's election that he had run for VP comms a couple of years before. I'll check the interview on my hard drive and get back to you

I'm pretty sure he was in 3rd year the first time he ran and was repeating 3rd year the second time he did. Anyway, his statement that someone could be on campus for 2 years and not know about the student's union is completely disingenuous in my opinion.

Michellenman

the_observer wrote: »

I dunno if it was second year, but he did say in an interview with us prior to this year's election that he had run for VP comms a couple of years before. I'll check the interview on my hard drive and get back to you

Well it definitely wasn't his final year because he ran successfully the following year and then for president last year.

Even if it was 3rd year, which I suppose is classed as final year for most, if he repeated and repeated then it's a bit misleading to say final year when he went on to run 3 times before he graduated third year.

LeixlipRed

Your Text Here wrote: »

Different reps for Masters and PhD students I assume.

I know I'm probably going to get eaten for saying this, but I get where Rob is coming from in his response. Maynooth has absolutely no class rep system whatsoever, and whatever it takes needs to be done in order to get one up and running. I still don't agree with the view that it needs to be held in a hotel to work, but at least this isn't going to be a yearly thing like it is in the likes of UCD.

But think about it, he's saying it's not going to be a yearly thing. Why can he safely say that? Because he won't be here next year! So if he doesn't happen next year he can say, "told you so". If it does he can say, "well I had no power over that". Don't let a few thousand words distract from the fact that he has not answered the central question of interest here, why can this training not take place at next to zero cost on campus?

How so Joe

Michellenman wrote: »

Well it definitely wasn't his final year because he ran successfully the following year and then for president last year.

Even if it was 3rd year, which I suppose is classed as final year for most, if he repeated and repeated then it's a bit misleading to say final year when he went on to run 3 times before he graduated third year.

If he was in final year, which is what most people would call third year when you're doing a three year degree, when he ran (and failed) and ran again when he did third year the second and succeeded in getting the position then the way he's referring to it is correct, although misleading.
If he ran in third year, and once in final year and once while taking a leave of absence from his sabbat position, that is to say.
And he hasn't graduated yet.

XxMCRxBabyxX

Your Text Here wrote: »

Different reps for Masters and PhD students I assume.

I know I'm probably going to get eaten for saying this, but I get where Rob is coming from in his response. Maynooth has absolutely no class rep system whatsoever, and whatever it takes needs to be done in order to get one up and running. I still don't agree with the view that it needs to be held in a hotel to work, but at least this isn't going to be a yearly thing like it is in the likes of UCD.

The thing is no one here seems to disagree with that bit! We all want a better c lass rep system! I knew nothing, and as a result did nothing, when i was a class rep in 1st year.

But why a hotel? It just seems like an unnecessary amount of money to spend when the same thing can be done on campus

Michellenman

How so Joe wrote: »

If he was in final year, which is what most people would call third year when you're doing a three year degree, when he ran (and failed) and ran again when he did third year the second and succeeded in getting the position then the way he's referring to it is correct, although misleading.
If he ran in third year, and once in final year and once while taking a leave of absence from his sabbat position, that is to say.
And he hasn't graduated yet.

Which is why I said it was misleading in the post you quoted me..

How so Joe

Michellenman wrote: »

Which is why I said it was misleading in the post you quoted me..

Touché.

Seren_

I didn't mean that me agreeing with Rob on the bit about a functioning class rep system would be bad (i know everyone wants one that will work), I meant the fact that his response made me understand where the SU were coming from when they decided on a hotel for the training. Even if I don't agree with it.

the_observer

Michellenman wrote: »

Rob; from the article above.


Didn't he run a failed campaign for VP comms and dev when he was in second year?

Hey, I couldn't get the bloody speakers working on my laptop, so I've re-upped the Interview itself here:

http://stobserver.wordpress.com/2011/03/08/the-big-audio-interview-rob-munnelly/

Pretty sure the answer's in there, it's also definitely worth a listen all the way through, interesting points six months on.

Sorry I couldn't be of more help.

-Dave

LeixlipRed

Listened to in totality there:

Talks about working with USI and the a fresh government to direct policy and being happy the graduate tax wasn't implemented. Reading between the lines you'd assume this is an effort to fight fees. And yet here we are now, months later spending 5k of our money on this rubbish.

Says website will be ready in four weeks max. That was 6 months ago.

Talks about the Mary Coughlan protest, which involved FEE who he's now sniping at.

Nothing much else in that interview of any substance.

How so Joe

And most importantly he didn't say when he first ran.

Liber8or

Seems like a typical "Celtic-Tiger" era reaction to a problem - If it's not working, throw money at it to make it work.

Why oh why must I say this again? The S.U has always and will always remain a clique. Friends of friends who run together and tell their friends to vote for their friends while rotating positions of prominence in the S.U... The very reason I voted for people who's names I didn't recognise on the ballot last year. As stupid as that maybe, perhaps it is indicative of the absolute joke the S.U is...

Smartest move the S.U can make this year? Change the constitution to only allowing candidates run once every two years for all positions. So, if you are VP + Comms this year, you can not run for ANYTHING next year.

By the way, class reps (effectively strangers to one another) are not going to go to a hotel for a night on their own... They will bring a friend or two and hang with them for the night whilst trying to get away from all the "work". This is college, these people are 17/18/19, they are here to have fun and help along the way. They have the rest of their lives to attend boring conferences...

the_observer

How so Joe wrote: »

And most importantly he didn't say when he first ran.

Damn. He said it somewhere. Hurm.

lordgoat

5 grand in total for training of 140 people in fairness is reasonable.

Sometimes to replace a system that doesn't work you need to spend to get quality in.

I'd be more hesitant until after you saw the breakdown for the cash and what each class rep comes away with. If for example you get >60% (in it's initial year and rising thereafter) of reps playing an active role and helping their class, playing an active role at council meetings etc, then that's not the worst use of money.

Sometimes i find people are easy to outrage before stepping back and asking 'well could this actually be beneficial'

/awaits the barrage.

LeixlipRed

5,000 euro to train people is reasonable as opposed to training them for free on campus? Reasonable when people are struggling to make ends meet. Not justifiable at all to me, the principle of the thing stinks.