Student Union

empacher

I believe the last post had an extensive look at the areas where money was being lost on the SU commercial services.

In brief.

Rising pay scales of unskilled workers being proportional to that of lecteurers.

Full time workers having premium rates for weekends, bank holidays etc

Lack of profit from carvery dinners.

Lack of profit from drink sales in bar.

Consultants and SU personal payroll being too expensive.

Mismanaging of assets by previous SUs.

No cohesive long term plan for the SU, or goals from previous SUs being carried forward.

SU not using it's collective power, due to lack of student interest.

Lockstep

Posts edited.
The last thread was deleted for a reason. By all means, post your criticisms of SU Commercial Services but don't single out posters to try and continue the argument in the last thread.

Ficheall

May one ask the reason, Lockstep?

Lockstep

Original thread was deleted at the request of the original poster and I see little reason to overrule this decision. Feel free to have a new discussion on the SU but leave the original poster out of it unless they choose to post in the thread.

Ficheall

I didn't want it over-ruled, I was just curious.
I'm going to go out on a limb and speculate that the poster of the original thread was regretting the combination of postings and revealing who they were. A valuable life lesson!

Lostman1990

I'll point out one area which I feel should really be looked at. It is the SU's continued alliance with the USI. I do admit I am not really up to speed with what they do at a national level for us in NUI Galway. I am a supporter of some of the wonderful services the SU do around the university and think that the money we send to the USI each year would even give that local support a bigger boost. The only time I remember seen the USI candidates in the college was when they were going for reelection. All the same "We will do this, and we will do that". But nothing ever changes at our level. I really think it is time to consider pulling out of this umbrella body which has failed.
I do stand corrected if anyone can actually state anything of note that this body has completed over the last few years.

geranamo

Lostman1990 wrote: »

I'll point out one area which I feel should really be looked at. It is the SU's continued alliance with the USI. I do admit I am not really up to speed with what they do at a national level for us in NUI Galway. I am a supporter of some of the wonderful services the SU do around the university and think that the money we send to the USI each year would even give that local support a bigger boost. The only time I remember seen the USI candidates in the college was when they were going for reelection. All the same "We will do this, and we will do that". But nothing ever changes at our level. I really think it is time to consider pulling out of this umbrella body which has failed.
I do stand corrected if anyone can actually state anything of note that this body has completed over the last few years.

The USI provide training to the SU officers and continued support throughout the year.
Lets be honest about it, if there was no SU or USI would be have such a generous third level education system. I mean how many other countries give grants to their students? If the USI weren't picking on politicians all the time, then they would have no problem getting rid of the grant.

Lostman1990

geranamo wrote: »

The USI provide training to the SU officers and continued support throughout the year.
Lets be honest about it, if there was no SU or USI would be have such a generous third level education system. I mean how many other countries give grants to their students? If the USI weren't picking on politicians all the time, then they would have no problem getting rid of the grant.

I'm not arguing about the SU's.
Lets just take Master's courses into consideration. Quite a few European countries have minimal fees and quite generous grants available to students to partake in these. I know of a fellow student who went to Hong Kong on a 4 month exchange. He said it is an immensely expensive city. However, he got an apartment for 750 euro for 4 months. It was because he was student. They subsidize these things for students in these countries.
Ireland doesn't have a generous third level system in comparison to many countries. It is actually quite poor.

geranamo

Lostman1990 wrote: »

I'm not arguing about the SU's.
Lets just take Master's courses into consideration. Quite a few European countries have minimal fees and quite generous grants available to students to partake in these. I know of a fellow student who went to Hong Kong on a 4 month exchange. He said it is an immensely expensive city. However, he got an apartment for 750 euro for 4 months. It was because he was student. They subsidize these things for students in these countries.
Ireland doesn't have a generous third level system in comparison to many countries. It is actually quite poor.

But if we look at the UK or the USA, going to uni would nearly require a morgage. It takes an average of 20 years to pay back. At least I won't have any debts when I finish my undergrad.
I actually think we should have fees for masters. There is way too many graduates in this country. And that's because it is too easy to get into college.

wmirl

geranamo wrote: »

But if we look at the UK or the USA, going to uni would nearly require a morgage. It takes an average of 20 years to pay back. At least I won't have any debts when I finish my undergrad.
I actually think we should have fees for masters. There is way too many graduates in this country. And that's because it is too easy to get into college.

We do have fees for masters and almost every other type of postgrad. For research postgrads, usually you get fees paid from your funding authority (IRC, SFI etc). Very few taught postgrads don't have fees, it's been the case for a few years now that you only get a €2000 contribution towards fees if you're on a low income.

Fees isn't the answer to curtailing college entrants, all that does is make college inaccessible to poor and disadvantaged people. College isn't for everyone but there's not many other avenues they can go to get a decent job or into a trade, or at least one that's emphasised to them during second level.

geranamo

wmirl wrote: »

We do have fees for masters and almost every other type of postgrad. For research postgrads, usually you get fees paid from your funding authority (IRC, SFI etc). Very few taught postgrads don't have fees, it's been the case for a few years now that you only get a €2000 contribution towards fees if you're on a low income.

Fees isn't the answer to curtailing college entrants, all that does is make college inaccessible to poor and disadvantaged people. College isn't for everyone but there's not many other avenues they can go to get a decent job or into a trade, or at least one that's emphasised to them during second level.

What I meant was that they should retain fees for masters. Otherwise everyone will eventually have to do a masters. We see the same thing with the leaving cert. 20 years ago the leaving cert was worth something and could get you a job. But now everyone has the leaving cert, so we all have to go to college. A person that has just completed their undergrad should go and work for a few years and then come back. Its difficult for a leaving cert to do that.

Ficheall

And the more people who do Masters, the more money the university gets - the devaluation of qualifications is in the university's interests, you might say.

wmirl

Ficheall wrote: »

And the more people who do Masters, the more money the university gets - the devaluation of qualifications is in the university's interests, you might say.

You mean the college isn't acting in the students' best interests? That doesn't sound like the NUIG we all know and love!

Lostman1990

geranamo wrote: »

But if we look at the UK or the USA, going to uni would nearly require a morgage. It takes an average of 20 years to pay back. At least I won't have any debts when I finish my undergrad.
I actually think we should have fees for masters. There is way too many graduates in this country. And that's because it is too easy to get into college.

If you are talking about some of the top universities in the USA and UK, the reasons the fees are so high is the quality of education they get. They are taught by Nobel prize winners in each of there fields. The resources available for knowledge transfer between university and college are fantastic.
The reason we have developed as a country where higher levels of educational attainment is needed is because our industrial policy is directed at enticing companies to this country where those skills are needed. We are positioning ourselves as a knowledge economy and yet, the prospects of attaining an average degree in this country is going beyond the reach of many people.
And that is even before we start talking about quality of education in this country. The quality of education in this country has remained stagnant of many years. Quantity has increased but quality remains the same. And if you really look into the education in the ivy league colleges, they have some amazing full paid scholarships for the brightest of students over there.
You simply can't have a knowledge economy without the human resource aspect. The government cut 18 million a year for people doing Masters courses in this country. 18 million...not a huge amount. But the effect that will have on maybe 1000-2000 people in this country choosing to become part of this so called knowledge economy will be felt. And what did the USI say about this? I can never even remember them saying anything. This was just snuck in as a extra on one of the budgets.

Lostman1990

geranamo wrote: »

What I meant was that they should retain fees for masters. Otherwise everyone will eventually have to do a masters. We see the same thing with the leaving cert. 20 years ago the leaving cert was worth something and could get you a job. But now everyone has the leaving cert, so we all have to go to college. A person that has just completed their undergrad should go and work for a few years and then come back. Its difficult for a leaving cert to do that.

The structure of the economy has changed. That is why 20 years ago a leaving cert was enough to get a job.
This started out as a debate on why I felt the USI haven't been strong enough for us and why the NUI SU would be better off keeping that money for local projects.
But it has turned into a "If we didn't have a subsidized third level education system", we'd all be grand with our leaving certs and get jobs. Nonsense argument. Companies choose for FDI based on many things. Skill sets being one.