Future of the Union (1 Viewer)

[Selador]

Hey guys, as you would have probably heard the future of your union is under threat.

You would have received an extraordinary email yesterday from the Deputy VC and Registrar Derrick Armstrong about the future of the USU and the university taking over commercial operations on campus.

If you haven't seen it it is here: http://www.ug.it.usyd.edu.au/~acha3507/armstrongletter.txt

The union has been caught by surprise. It seems the university has stopped negotiating and is intent on ripping student run services away from students. Even Manning Bar is under threat.

See https://www.facebook.com/notes/adam...ments-and-emails-some-facts/10150349851021485 for some facts and rebuttals of the Armstrong email

 

[kaz1]

occupy usyd

 

[Aerath]

I was quite surprised at this. Bit low of the University to be doing this whilst:
1. There's no Honi Soit to rebut comments
2. It's STUVAC/SWOTVAC, so many people are too busy to check uni-emails and/or information like this cannot be disseminated as easily as it could otherwise.
3. Whilst the USU President is overseas, on a trip the University [allegedly] sent her to.

Bit shady.

 

[Rafy]

Union's response is here: http://yourunionboard.blogspot.com/2011/11/update-on-usu-university-negotiations.html

 

[Rafy]

https://www.facebook.com/notes/are-you-with-us/the-senate-votes-tomorrow/295876310453350

The last week has seen some significant developments occur in the continued negotiations between the University of Sydney and the University of Sydney Union. By this point, you are probably aware of the challenges that the USU faces in attempting to maintain control of its commercial operations, and by extension, the student-run student experience.

We suspect that this Monday (December 5th), the University Senate will vote on a motion that details the University's intentions for a USU commercial takeover, presented by the University’s Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education), Professor Derrick Armstrong. The confidential nature of this motion and discussion means that no USU representation at the meeting is allowed, and with no voice to speak against the motion we run the very big risk that it will pass.

Tomorrow the Senate is likely to endorse a plan that supports a purchase of the USU's commercial operations for the price of $3 million or less - a far cry from what they’re worth in independent financial support for the growth of the USU’s student programs. Further, if the USU doesn't accept such an offer, the University has made it clear that they will refuse to fund the USU at all in 2012, cutting off all support until a form of their offer is accepted. These conditions are unacceptable, and fly in the face of the steady "good faith" negotiation tactics that the University had agreed to abide by.

To add further to this distrust is the fact that this motion was not brought to the attention of the USU or any stakeholders of the University community; the board is only aware of these developments because it was leaked to them late last week. The University administration did not go to any effort to consult its students on such a significant proposal. Such a shift could represent a colossal change to the USU's ability to provide events, clubs, food, bars and festivals at the high quality that Sydney students are accustomed to and deserve.

 

[aussiechick007]

this sucks!!! and they're also introducing that fee (HAVE introduced it!) ... a 'student services and amenities' fee ... regardless of whether we've already paid union membership or not!! I DONT WANT TO PAY THEM!

 

[OzKo]

this sucks!!! and they're also introducing that fee (HAVE introduced it!) ... a 'student services and amenities' fee ... regardless of whether we've already paid union membership or not!! I DONT WANT TO PAY THEM!

Pretty sure that is down to the federal government reintroducing compulsory student unionism which is a total load shit. Can't blame the university for doing that, mind.

Keep mind, this is my personal opinion and not that of the university.

 

[Rafy]

Pretty sure that is down to the federal government reintroducing compulsory student unionism which is a total load shit. Can't blame the university for doing that, mind.

Although the university do support the fee and did lobby the federal government in favour of it.

As did the student organisations who claim to represent students. (Yeh, slugging all students with a $250/year fee is really going to help them)

 

[aussiechick007]

ok sure compulsory student unionism, but what about those that are already union members?? i paid for 4 years, this'll be my 3rd year... shouldn't that count for something?

 

[izzy88]

The fee the government is introducing isn't compulsory student unionism. This is because the university is not obliged to give any of the money to the union, and university collects the money (not the union) nor do you become a member of the union by paying the student amenities fee. I expect the reason the union is still charging fees is because there is no guarantee as to how much the Uni will give them, and it may not equal what they were already getting from students paying for membership. The union, and the student amenities fees are two very separate things.

 

[meilz92]

Hey guys, as you would have probably heard the future of your union is under threat.

:')

 

[meilz92]

hope im still around to see its demise

 

[Rafy]

why would you want to see its demise?

 

[melanieeee.]

holy smokes this is more than double what ive been paying for union each year... what a rip... let the people who use the services pay for the services...