Class Rep training junket?

XxMCRxBabyxX

lordgoat wrote: »

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.

But what extra benefit do you get that you wouldn't if the training was held on campus?

lordgoat

XxMCRxBabyxX wrote: »

But what extra benefit do you get that you wouldn't if the training was held on campus?

As i said, i'll wait for the breakdown of the figures before i criticise or go rushing the streets.

Also there is a benefit from training people off site. It's used in various companies for various reasons. I'm not saying it is or isn't justifiable yet but if at the end of year this training is a success, i'll enjoy watching the humble pie being handed out as much as i will enjoy the 'told you so merchants' that will have a field day if it falls on it's hole.

Either way, someone won't be happy. Except me right now as i'm going for chips. Yep chips with garlic sauce.

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

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.

But would it be free on campus? Surely they'd feed them, they nearly always provide food when you have to spend time with the SU. So that, at least, is some cost. Not a cost of five grand, admittedly, but still a cost.

lordgoat

LeixlipRed wrote: »

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.

Yes they are physically taking food out of peoples mouths with this training. But you don't know what they're doing with the money yet.... Oh i see what you did there.


Training people to do a job stinks. Another illuminating point dude.

LeixlipRed

lordgoat wrote: »

As i said, i'll wait for the breakdown of the figures before i criticise or go rushing the streets.

Also there is a benefit from training people off site. It's used in various companies for various reasons. I'm not saying it is or isn't justifiable yet but if at the end of year this training is a success, i'll enjoy watching the humble pie being handed out as much as i will enjoy the 'told you so merchants' that will have a field day if it falls on it's hole.

Either way, someone won't be happy. Except me right now as i'm going for chips. Yep chips with garlic sauce.

See companies spend their money training people. They don't spend other people's money. They're spending my money on a piss up. That's what I have issue with.

LeixlipRed

lordgoat wrote: »

Yes they are physically taking food out of peoples mouths with this training. But you don't know what they're doing with the money yet.... Oh i see what you did there.


Training people to do a job stinks. Another illuminating point dude.

I wouldn't expect you to see it my way. Perhaps you could see it another way.

If FG decided tomorrow to spend a weekend in a hotel courtesy of the taxpayer, even though the taxpayer still pays that money regardless would you be ok with it?

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

See companies spend their money training people. They don't spend other people's money. They're spending my money on a piss up. That's what I have issue with.

In all fairness, while I don't agree with the hotel thing, there's been nothing mentioned about paying for drinks for the class reps. I mean if they won't even get them dessert, like...
Also, o/t, Lordgoat, that was either some wicked fast chips with garlic sauce getting, or you've been lying to us. :pac:`

LeixlipRed

How so Joe wrote: »

In all fairness, while I don't agree with the hotel thing, there's been nothing mentioned about paying for drinks for the class reps. I mean if they won't even get them dessert, like...
Also, o/t, Lordgoat, that was either some wicked fast chips with garlic sauce getting, or you've been lying to us. :pac:`

I'm talking about what this trip will actually boil down to, a pissup. Let's not kid ourselves.

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I'm talking about what this trip will actually boil down to, a pissup. Let's not kid ourselves.

Unless they very cleverly picked a hotel with no bar and too far from an off-licence for trips but don't tell this to the class reps, in which case they'll all be forced to stay sober and play card games?
Or, alternatively, you could remember that people are capable of working and drinking - isn't that what the entirety of college is about?

LeixlipRed

Oh now you're trying to twist my words to make it sound like I'm against having fun or drinking or whatever. I'm not. I'm just saying that there's history for these events being less about the training and more about the drinking. For example in 2008 in UCD, this is what happened:

http://www.issuu.com/tribune/docs/issue22.3

We're getting away from the core argument. I believe that this event should be held on campus for the cost of a free sambo and a cup of tea for each person. Not in a hotel for 5,000 euro. I also believe it's completely wrong that the SU feel it's ok to spend that 5,000 euro in the current climate.

lordgoat

LeixlipRed wrote: »

See companies spend their money training people. They don't spend other people's money. They're spending my money on a piss up. That's what I have issue with.

Companies also have these things called shareholders and these other things called budgets. It's what they use to justify spending money on, in this case, training. If there is a need and it requires X amount because of reasons X,Y,Z then it's used.

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I wouldn't expect you to see it my way. Perhaps you could see it another way.

If FG decided tomorrow to spend a weekend in a hotel courtesy of the taxpayer, even though the taxpayer still pays that money regardless would you be ok with it?

But you see, i've not decided how i see it, i'm merely waiting to see what the 5k will be used for before manning the decks and hoisting the rigging.

If FG/FF/Labour decided to spend a weekend away in a hotel (also it's only one night but hey why not twist facts to improve a weak argument) and they said well we're having a conference for this reason, we're having it here for this reason and it's going to cost us this much for these reasons then i'd have zero problem with it, as long as the reasons are valid.

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I'm talking about what this trip will actually boil down to, a pissup. Let's not kid ourselves.

got a source for that?


You pay nothing and that's what you'll get by and large in my opinion. What's the last thing anyones gotten for free?

Also are you willing to go on record that if training is deemed successful and a class rep system that works and is an improvement on the current one you'll hold your hands up and say you got it wrong. Oh and maybe give back the possible time waster to the protestors next week? I don't know maybe you could walk dogs, do dishes etc. Cos after all time is far more valuable than money.

For all concerned, chips are mega, i even splurged on a battered sausage. Noice.

LeixlipRed

lordgoat wrote: »

Also are you willing to go on record that if training is deemed successful and a class rep system that works and is an improvement on the current one you'll hold your hands up and say you got it wrong. Oh and maybe give back the possible time waster to the protestors next week? I don't know maybe you could walk dogs, do dishes etc. Cos after all time is far more valuable than money.

For all concerned, chips are mega, i even splurged on a battered sausage. Noice.

Do you even believe one would be able to measure whether it's successful or not? Also, you seem to be confused, is this 5,000 being spent on rooms in hotels or some guru who's gonna buzzword the shop up and turn our class reps into power suit wearing self-empowered supermen?

The students who'll protest will do so next week because they think the principle is wrong. Nothing to do with being opposed to training the class reps. Those students will do so without your approval and are not seeking to represent or speak for you or other students who share the same opinion as you. We know from previous discussions on this forum that you simply don't look at things the same way as I do so I'm not sure what point there is in even responding to you.

As for the question, I want the training to be successful, I do not want any money spent on hotel accommodation. So if the trip goes ahead I'll condemn that apsect of it and won't change position even if these students come back as the best class reps ever. Because I believe, unlike you that there is no value to be extracted from changing location to a hotel and paying for it as opposed to holding it in a room, on campus for free.

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Oh now you're trying to twist my words to make it sound like I'm against having fun or drinking or whatever. I'm not. I'm just saying that there's history for these events being less about the training and more about the drinking. For example in 2008 in UCD, this is what happened:

http://www.issuu.com/tribune/docs/issue22.3

We're getting away from the core argument. I believe that this event should be held on campus for the cost of a free sambo and a cup of tea for each person. Not in a hotel for 5,000 euro. I also believe it's completely wrong that the SU feel it's ok to spend that 5,000 euro in the current climate.

A sambo and a cup of tea is a bit harsh! If you want a working class rep system, you have to at least give them something. Clubs and socs training is held on campus and it's the most deathly boring evening/day anyone ever had to sit through, but at least you get a meal and a drink out of it.

If you're gonna make the class reps sit through two days worth of lectures, you're gonna have to give them something. Even the ones who are passionate about representing their classes will be loath to spend two days listening to lectures and get only a sandwich

I don't disagree that it should be held on campus, I do think a trip away to a hotel is an unnecessary expense, but holding it on campus isn't going to be free, either.

LeixlipRed

No, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot less. And why does it have to be two days? I don't think we've held this event in a few years so how does anyone know how long it's going to be held. Make it exciting, break the day up, have lots of group work, getting to know you type things. Everyone is focusing on how boring the thing is, remember that these people should be there because they want to represent their classmates, help them out essentially. They're adults, if they can't sit in a room for one day with a pile of their peers listening to a few talks and having a bit of craic then should possibly not get involved?

lordgoat

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Do you even believe one would be able to measure whether it's successful or not? Also, you seem to be confused, is this 5,000 being spent on rooms in hotels or some guru who's gonna buzzword the shop up and turn our class reps into power suit wearing self-empowered supermen?

The students who'll protest will do so next week because they think the principle is wrong. Nothing to do with being opposed to training the class reps. Those students will do so without your approval and are not seeking to represent or speak for you or other students who share the same opinion as you. We know from previous discussions on this forum that you simply don't look at things the same way as I do so I'm not sure what point there is in even responding to you.

As for the question, I want the training to be successful, I do not want any money spent on hotel accommodation. So if the trip goes ahead I'll condemn that apsect of it and won't change position even if these students come back as the best class reps ever. Because I believe, unlike you that there is no value to be extracted from changing location to a hotel and paying for it as opposed to holding it in a room, on campus for free.

Yes it's quite easy to see if it'll be a success. One quick way number of class reps going to student council now vs the end of the year. There are a few other ways too.

I'm not confused at all but i think you certainly are. I have no idea what the money will be spent on, sure some of it will on on accomodation but I want to see the breakdown first. Now have you got that, as i've said it before but you seem to miss it somehow.

The principle of the weekend is class rep training the issue you have is with the delivery of where said training is taking place. Symantics, granted but it's incorrect to say you are against the principle of it.

Also the bit in bold, you're twisting words again. I've already said on this thread i'd prefer to see training taking place on campus. Do you pay attention or just scaremonger and twist for the sake of it.

Also seen as there's been no training for the last few years 5grand is looking even cheaper.

LeixlipRed wrote: »

No, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot less. And why does it have to be two days? I don't think we've held this event in a few years so how does anyone know how long it's going to be held. Make it exciting, break the day up, have lots of group work, getting to know you type things. Everyone is focusing on how boring the thing is, remember that these people should be there because they want to represent their classmates, help them out essentially. They're adults, if they can't sit in a room for one day with a pile of their peers listening to a few talks and having a bit of craic then should possibly not get involved?

How do you know they're not going to have work groups etc? Is there an itinerary already? If so i've missed that.

You seem to think that having some fun and going to training aren't compatible. Some of the best training sessions i've had have been on weekends away where there was alot of fun had and some of the worst. Held in company HQ that were painful, boring and totally useless.

The point that you fail to see is that spending money sometimes is not a bad idea. But i really do ever expect you to change your mind on it.

You say you want the training to be a success but you've said nothing to indicate that in this thread. Even the title is a joke. You've made your mind up, you've judged, condemned organised a protest before you even know the details of what's happening. And then even if it is successful you wouldn't admit to it being worth the money.

For all that i hope it pisses rain on Monday, i find that ad weather really weeds out those not dedicated to the protest. And surely, much like the class rep training you'd only want those 100% dedicated to representing their peers and also the bad weather would help that there was less craic had.

LeixlipRed

I'm just not going to reply because in the middle there you said I was against these things being fun when I clearly said I thought they could make these things fun. If you're not going to read what I post then what's the point? And yes you'll respond with some smart quip but I don't really care to be frank, people can make their own minds up.

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

No, but it's gonna cost a hell of a lot less. And why does it have to be two days? I don't think we've held this event in a few years so how does anyone know how long it's going to be held. Make it exciting, break the day up, have lots of group work, getting to know you type things. Everyone is focusing on how boring the thing is, remember that these people should be there because they want to represent their classmates, help them out essentially. They're adults, if they can't sit in a room for one day with a pile of their peers listening to a few talks and having a bit of craic then should possibly not get involved?

Well how does anyone know how long it will take? I don't know - but I'm only working on what the union has said will be the programme - two days, one night.
And it's already been stated that some of the information being given out is, essentially, boring. I think it was Rob said that.
Although one can only assume that the programme is designed to be as not-boring as possible, because even if they have nowhere to go, there's nothing to stop these class reps from falling asleep or playing with their smartphones or whatever, so I'd say that would be the idea regardless of where the training is.

And nobody likes to sit in talks all day (well, some people might, but they're weird), but you do it because you have to, or because it'll make you better at your job, or because the union says they'll dock your capitation if you don't do it, or for whatever reason. So the reps will go to the talks. But they're likely to pay a little more attention if they're not starving midway through the afternoon because they were only given one sandwich and they don't drink tea...

Oh, and one last point, they're not necessarily all adults. Especially not the first years, and possibly even not some second years.

mickstupp

lordgoat wrote: »

Yes it's quite easy to see if it'll be a success. One quick way number of class reps going to student council now vs the end of the year. There are a few other ways too.

That would be an entirely invalid way of gauging success. There's no way to link attendance at student council to how successful rep training in a hotel was. And even if we end up with the best set of reps the world has ever seen, there's still no way to tell whether they would have been better or worse than if they'd been trained on campus.

The success or failure of the thing has effectively nothing to do with the location and everything to do with a) the quality of the training itself, and b) the people being trained. The issue in this thread, as I see it, is the cost, using student contributions to fund this trip when it's (from this point of view) unnecessary.

We all want a group of well trained and excellent reps. But there's been no genuinely decent reason why it would be a success off campus and not on campus. At present, all it looks like is needless expense. And whether or not offsite training is used in various companies for various reasons has no bearing on this situation whatsoever. It's actually completely irrelevant. In this case we're dealing with a university with ample space and facilities for the task.

What we need is the right people for the positions. Having the training in a hotel rather than on campus is not going to change that simple fact.

LeixlipRed

How so Joe wrote: »

And nobody likes to sit in talks all day (well, some people might, but they're weird), but you do it because you have to, or because it'll make you better at your job, or because the union says they'll dock your capitation if you don't do it, or for whatever reason. So the reps will go to the talks. But they're likely to pay a little more attention if they're not starving midway through the afternoon because they were only given one sandwich and they don't drink tea...

Oh, and one last point, they're not necessarily all adults. Especially not the first years, and possibly even not some second years.

Is there any other point to this post bar to focus on two points, one a joke about sambos and tea and the other about the students being adults? I deem an adult to be someone who's left school. If they don't feel grown up enough they should opt out.

How so Joe

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Is there any other point to this post bar to focus on two points, one a joke about sambos and tea and the other about the students being adults? I deem an adult to be someone who's left school. If they don't feel grown up enough they should opt out.

Well, grown up and adult are two different concepts. But my post was mostly responding to your point on the length of training - given there's been no training in years, then we don't know how long adequate training of new class reps would take.
But your point, and my response, have little to do with the actual thread topic, of whether training should be on- or off-campus, so we may as well leave it at that.

lordgoat

LeixlipRed wrote: »

I'm just not going to reply because in the middle there you said I was against these things being fun when I clearly said I thought they could make these things fun. If you're not going to read what I post then what's the point? And yes you'll respond with some smart quip but I don't really care to be frank, people can make their own minds up.

Another well thought out argument brought to a close by LeixlipRed, excellent i won't have to keep correcting you, or pointing out where you twist words. Oh and apologies for my mis-read earlier.

mickstupp wrote: »

That would be an entirely invalid way of gauging success. There's no way to link attendance at student council to how successful rep training in a hotel was. And even if we end up with the best set of reps the world has ever seen, there's still no way to tell whether they would have been better or worse than if they'd been trained on campus.

The success or failure of the thing has effectively nothing to do with the location and everything to do with a) the quality of the training itself, and b) the people being trained. The issue in this thread, as I see it, is the cost, using student contributions to fund this trip when it's (from this point of view) unnecessary.

We all want a group of well trained and excellent reps. But there's been no genuinely decent reason why it would be a success off campus and not on campus. At present, all it looks like is needless expense. And whether or not offsite training is used in various companies for various reasons has no bearing on this situation whatsoever. It's actually completely irrelevant. In this case we're dealing with a university with ample space and facilities for the task.

What we need is the right people for the positions. Having the training in a hotel rather than on campus is not going to change that simple fact.

Here, i'll walk you through it.
1) Take class rep attendance
2) Do training, wherever it may be, but it does look like it's going to be off campus
3) Has this training improved attendance.

Also please note i said one quick way, not the only or main one.

Also how can you make assumptions on what the money is being spent on? People are obsessed with free and cheap options when at times investment brings a great long term return. I'm not saying this is the case. I am saying it could be the case.



Also there are numerous reasons as to why **** loads of companies and corporations have training weekends outside of their workplace. If the money being spent can be justified properly and not with some wishy washy crap then it's fair to use it for that purpose.

LeixlipRed

How so Joe wrote: »

Well, grown up and adult are two different concepts. But my post was mostly responding to your point on the length of training - given there's been no training in years, then we don't know how long adequate training of new class reps would take.
But your point, and my response, have little to do with the actual thread topic, of whether training should be on- or off-campus, so we may as well leave it at that.

I don't know anything about how long it takes, we're just guessing. But I assume it could be done in a day. If not then two days on campus is still cheaper than a hotel trip plus transport plus food.

mickstupp

lordgoat wrote: »

Here, i'll walk you through it.
1) Take class rep attendance
2) Do training, wherever it may be, but it does look like it's going to be off campus
3) Has this training improved attendance.

Also please note i said one quick way, not the only or main one.

Correlation does not actually equal causation.

Also how can you make assumptions on what the money is being spent on? People are obsessed with free and cheap options when at times investment brings a great long term return. I'm not saying this is the case. I am saying it could be the case.

I'm making one assumption, as far as I can tell. There will be training, room and board in a hotel for 120-140 people, for two days and one night, as per Rob's post. Since Rob's already told us as much, the only assumption I can see that I'm making is that this will go ahead. I'm probably missing something though. The cost of the training itself is something I'm sure can be justified perfectly well. But the issue is using student contributions to hold said training off campus when that particular part seems unnecessary and has not, yet, been justified.

Also there are numerous reasons as to why **** loads of companies and corporations have training weekends outside of their workplace. If the money being spent can be justified properly and not with some wishy washy crap then it's fair to use it for that purpose.

First, yes fair enough, if the money can be justified properly. The point here is that a number of people do not believe a trip to a hotel can be justified, and we've been given no good reasons as to why it would be. Second, again the numerous reasons why companies, corporations or anyone else holds training weekends offsite are irrelevant. NUIM has space and facilities enough to accomodate the training, as far as I'm aware. Maybe I'm wrong. There's no good reason that I can see that doing this training off campus rather than on campus would be of benefit.

lordgoat

mickstupp wrote: »

Correlation does not actually equal causation.

I'm making one assumption, as far as I can tell. There will be training, room and board in a hotel for 120-140 people, for two days and one night, as per Rob's post. Since Rob's already told us as much, the only assumption I can see that I'm making is that this will go ahead. I'm probably missing something though. The cost of the training itself is something I'm sure can be justified perfectly well. But the issue is using student contributions to hold said training off campus when that particular part seems unnecessary and has not, yet, been justified.

First, yes fair enough, if the money can be justified properly. The point here is that a number of people do not believe a trip to a hotel can be justified, and we've been given no good reasons as to why it would be. Second, again the numerous reasons why companies, corporations or anyone else holds training weekends offsite are irrelevant. NUIM has space and facilities enough to accomodate the training, as far as I'm aware. Maybe I'm wrong. There's no good reason that I can see that doing this training off campus rather than on campus would be of benefit.

Of course correlation doesn't equal causation all the time but in this specific case, seen as there is being a drastic change in how reps are being trained do you not think that any changes in class rep behaviour could be as a result of that. I picked one easy to measure quick test, which on it's one but in conjunction with a few others would be a good indication of how well/much of a use the training was.


As i've said i want to see what the money is being used for before i make a full judgement on the whole thing. I dislike the close-mindedness that people decide on one thing before knowing the full picture. It's not conducive to rational argument. For example some of the crappy but necessary team building training yokes i've been on use the fact that being away from your normal surroundings makes it seem less like work. And it's true, i can see the benefit of holding it offsite if done properly and efficiently.

Just for the record, TCD, DIT and UCD at least both have weekends away, and i'm pretty sure the others do the same. My class rep training consisted of... 'well if a student has a problem with something, try and help them with it' but that was a long long time ago

LeixlipRed

I re-read Rob's repsonse there and something I missed the first time struck me. It strikes me also as being deliberately misleading.

He says we'll train 6 years of class reps this year. Meaning next year we'll only have to train the 40 or so for first years. Hmmm, now that doesn't really make sense. Mainly because those reps are democratically elected and would have no guarantee of a second term the following year. And some people may not choose to run again. Just some food for thought.

Dr. Nguyen Van Falk

lordgoat wrote: »

Just for the record, TCD, DIT and UCD at least both have weekends away, and i'm pretty sure the others do the same. My class rep training consisted of... 'well if a student has a problem with something, try and help them with it' but that was a long long time ago

that's right UCD do have a weekend away and look at how well that works, its not that long ago that this reps training ended up with the students trashing the hotel after a night of drinkin, and just becouse its done doesnt mean its popular, one of the reasons the ucd's Brendan Lacey was elected was becouse he promised to cut the costs of this training. DCU on the other hand dont have a weekend away and according to rob they have 'a tradition of an active, engaged Class Rep system,'

LeixlipRed

Hey, the leafletting/petition will take place from 1pm to 3pm tomorrow outside the SU. I'd encourage people to come and help us hand out leaflets and talk to students and persuade them to sign the petition calling for the cancellation of the hotel trip and a rearrangement of the training to take place on campus. If you don't wanna stand out in the cold leafletting just pop along and sign the petition. And if anyone disagrees with us and wants to debate or argue the points then they're welcome to join us too. See you tomorrow!

Fbjm

LeixlipRed wrote: »

Hey, the leafletting/petition will take place from 1pm to 3pm tomorrow outside the SU. I'd encourage people to come and help us hand out leaflets and talk to students and persuade them to sign the petition calling for the cancellation of the hotel trip and a rearrangement of the training to take place on campus. If you don't wanna stand out in the cold leafletting just pop along and sign the petition. And if anyone disagrees with us and wants to debate or argue the points then they're welcome to join us too. See you tomorrow!

I'd be there but unfortunately can't make it. Good look in your cause though, I think it's a complete disgrace that Rob is blowing the students' money on this tripe.

LeixlipRed

Does anyone know if there's a union council this week before the training?

Eric Cartman

LeixlipRed wrote: »

So it is true. Even if it were being paid for by a grant that's still some taxpayers' money. It's a complete and utter disgrace. Funny how it corresponds with the election of known FF member to the SU executive. The party of junkets. Hold the training on campus which will cost nothing but the money for some food for lunch. I await the response were the excuse is something like this: "oh but we had to, sure you need a proper room to have a real training exercise in, we all couldn't hold hands while we get pissed in SU room 3-4, it's simply not big enough".

Will you ever give over on this , Youd swear FF were the Klan or something , next youll be blaming them for the holocaust or AIDS.

In all fairness I can understand where rob is coming from with needing to keep everyone in one place, and unfortunately theres no way to ensure attendance to the talks unless you put all of them in 1 place away from their homes / friends / the pub. Its a shame this has to cost money but it does , Perhaps ask elected candidates for a donation of whatever they can give to recoup the cost of this ? you obviously wont get everything back but im sure most of them would throw in a bit of cash