A group of York students has won the opportunity to have their very own I-phone application developed after winning The App Challenge final, held at the Ron Cooke Hub on Wednesday, January 18.
YUSU Welfare officer Bob Hughes has warned students to be vigilant after a student loans phishing scam has been revealed.
Her Majesty the Queen will be visiting York on Maundy Thursday, 5th April, as part of the 800th anniversary of York’s Charter for the traditional “Royal Maundy” ceremony.
A flood caused by a heating system “failure” forced the university IT services to shut down many essential systems on Sunday night, causing problems for many students on the eve of their exams and assignment due-dates.
Ellis, who said she was "too emotional" to read her statement, passed her speech on to Anne-Marie Canning, UGM Chair, to read. It said: "Violence, no matter how small the action or chance of physical harm is unacceptable in my eyes."
Ellis said she felt: "that being responsible for students is a gift of trust."
I am a bloody good Academic and Welfare officer.
She said: "I feel that the integrity of the Union has been questioned and has left her unable to comment on some key issues relevant to her job."
"If people, no matter how few, feel they can't talk to her about their problems then it is unacceptable."
Ellis spoke as one of the 'For' speeches in one of 12 motions debated at last nights meeting.
The full statement made by Joey Ellis can be read here
The debate over the motion of no confidence continued for some time, as various speakers raised their concerns about the continuance of Fletcher-Hackwood in her position.
Both parties involved, Dan Taylor and Fletcher-Hackwood, spoke during the UGM.
Fletcher-Hackwood told the filled Vanbrugh Dining Hall: "I would like to start by saying I am so, so, so sorry for hitting Dan Taylor and I am truly ashamed of my behaviour."
She told the room: "However, there are things for which I will not apologise for. I will not apologise for drinking alcohol. I will not apologise for slipping on a wet floor at a campus event last term, and I will not apologise for taking a leave of absence in my second year. Why do I bring up all these things? You might well ask that of the people involved in the campaign to smear me."
She continued: "On top of the guilt, my family and I have been upset by the malicious lies told about me during the past few weeks. So if you want to hurt me, you've done it."
She ended her speech with: “I’m sorry to sound as arrogant as you all think I am but I am a bloody good Academic and Welfare Officer.”
Taylor said: "It's nice to see Grace playing all our emotions there."
He said that he did not feel the apology issued by Fletcher-Hackwood via his Facebook profile the following morning, and publicly on The Yorker was "unequivocal".
He said: "A YUSU Academic and Welfare Officer hit another student, personalities out of this, because that's what pretty much everyone's tried to do, that is the crux of the matter."
“This boils down to the fact that she hit another student in a drunken, and unprovoked attack.”
For further details on all the motions discussed at the UGM see here
The dismissal of Doorsafe after the discussion of the motion suggests that trouble may have been expected; Sam Bayley, YUSU Societies and Communications Officer and co-Chair, told the bouncers: "Buzz, Nick, if you need to leave please feel free."
Sam,
How can you possible argue that not only YUSU, but you personally, as comms officer haven't handled this badly. It took almost a week for this story to break, you did nothing.
When it did, the only comment was from the YUSU president saying
"“I have full confidence that Grace can fulfil her academic and welfare role, and I think she is doing a great job for students. However, if Dan wants to take the matter any further, I will go through the whole complaints procedure with him and investigate the incident fully.”
Which you then denied was a statement of support, when in the absence of any other comment, it clearly is.
The only statement from YUSU came after you waited almost another week for Exec to meet, not bothering, or not thinking it was important enough to convene an earlier meeting.
With all due respect Sam, this is probably the biggest communications issue I've seen while I've been at York, it couldn't, in my opinion have been handled any worse.
Some early, decisive action, might not only end up saving Grace's career, but it would have stopped the Union looking ridiculous.
The worst thing to come out of all this is that it will eclipse all the good that YUSU and the current Sabb team have done and I do include Grace in that. I sit on Senate and know how much each YUSU officer and college chair put in and really do think its a shame that people are blaming YUSU as a whole for this. Non of this is YUSU' fault, it was Grace who lashed out and not the Sabb team or other officers.
YUSU is an organisation that is not like other places of work. It isnt possible for Grace to be disciplined by YUSU, it is only possible to do this at a UGM. The only thing I would bring YUSU up on is that only one Sabb officer took a stand on the issue, I personally would have liked to know where the other Sabbs stood on the issue.
Getting back to my point where YUSU is different from a normal job and workplace. I know much of the defence of Grace comes from the fact she was on a night out and is allowed to have a social life. The problem for me is that she was still on campus. Campus is her place of work and when on campus she should behave appropriatly. I do like Grace, but on a professional stance, I am in favour of the vote of no confidence. What Grace did was wrong and she should be forced to leave because of it. Also lets not forget the other welfare provisions we have at the uni. We have college reps, nightline, lgbt, womens officers, not everything welfare related falls onto Grace.
I am sure that if she were to stay she would work harder than ever before on student issues but this isnt the point, this dissmissal would be on fair grounds. She will still retain what she has done in the past and I hope she will work as hard in a future job.
Firstly can I say that YUSU operate within set boundaries of what they can and can't do, boundaries set by the student population. In respect to this incident YUSU have acted professionally, refusing to be drawn on the issue either way. The statement by Anne-Marie indicates a confidence in the job Grace was doing, and her ability to continue in that role, which after all, a majority of students voted for her to take, in an election.
I accept that it is a side point, but there is no way the 'welfare team' could possibly cover the job which Grace fulfils, to suggest so indicates a great underestimation of the size of the role.
Whilst I agree that the personalities involved should not influence the debate, I disagree that Graces past history in welfare should be forgotten. Grace is the womens officer who once took a stand against the YUSU constitution which would have removed equality reps from YUSU. She has pushed welfare issues harder than anyone else on campus throughout the 4 years I've been here. To remove her now would be detrimental to the welfare of York students; and as someone who has not always agreed with her, but has worked with her, and always respected her opinion; I'd urge every right thinking person on campus to reject the no-confidence motion.
It is unacceptable for anyone to hit a student, but Grace has accepted this and appolgised. The publicity this incident has generated is probably enough punishment. A vote of censure is appropriate; but a vote of no confidence strikes me as a vindictive measure.
Having been assaulted myself outside a campus event, (and by someone significantly more handy with their fists than Grace). I'm appaled that Dan has refused dialog, and instead taken to the most extreme route. Children run to their parents when their upset, adults sort issues out together. Dans actions smack of a lack of maturity; he knew exactly what would happen once campus media were invloved, and has sought to continue his vicious personal campiagn against Grace (which has gone on for some time), through this new oppurtunity.
As a Tory, I'm disgusted by the way in which Dan has dragged party politics, into what should be a private affair.
Kit Dixon
HCSA Vice-President (Welfare) 2006
HCSA Treasurer 2008
Clearly this is not about party-politics. If you were at the UGM yesterday, you would recognise that three of the people who spoke against Grace in her position, were in no way 'conservatives'. On the contrary, one is a sabbatical YUSU officer, one is a friend of Grace from the Labour Party and Alexios (a friend of mine) is certainly no Tory. Your claim appears to be on extremely thin ice and lacks entirely of any substance.
On the contrary, this campaign is not about party-politcs- indeed you claiming that you are a 'Tory' is entirely irrelevant and proves it is not me making this into a party-political issue... It is not about 'right or left'. It is about what is right and what is wrong. People who vote against the motion 'because Grace is wither a feminist/socialist' are missing the point. This is about whether people think that a YUSU Sabbatical A&W rep. hitting a student is acceptible, or whether it is not. In any other credible walk of life, someone who hit a collegue, breaching the mandate of their profession so blatently would either resign or get the sack. This should apply to Grace. She must accept the consequences and recognise that her credibility to campaign on important student issues like violence and responsible drinking is fundamentally undemined by her actions.
This is not personal and if you choose to believe that it is, then that is your own ill-informed opinion based on no fact. If we are going to make such accusations, I suggest you take a glance at the wall of Grace's support group on facebook and see who the 'personal smear campaign' is being directed at. I assure you, it is not Grace. If ANY YUSU Welfare Officer hit another student, I would call for their resignation as would many others.
As I iterated in the UGM speech, this does not undo Grace's past work in her position, but it affects fundamentally her ability to campaign credibly on issues that matter to York students. In additon, Grace must take responsibility for her actions and accept that her actions render her position as YUSU Sabbatical A&W Rep. untenable.
Dan Taylor
"This is about whether people think that a YUSU Sabbatical A&W rep. hitting a student is acceptible, or whether it is not."
It's not just that, though, is it? That is certainly the main point, but we also have to consider what will happen on the welfare front is the motion passes. I agree that what Grace did was undoubtedly wrong - I don't think you'll find anyone who defends her actions - and maybe some of the things she's said in her apologies have been inappropriate (I'm thinking here of her comments about how she couldn't hurt you because she's much smaller), but as someone who's served two years as a college welfare rep, I can tell you that it would be extremely difficult if not impossible for the rest of the welfare team and the sabbs to cover Grace's role. It's important to keep that in mind too, when deciding how to vote on this motion.
In reference to 45, I think that it is the main point, along with the apologies that just weren't really apologies. They could be close to the only point here. The problems that YUSU could potentially suffer are down to the actions of someone who has years of experience in welfare and the procedures around it. I realise that hindsight is always 20 20, but it is not too much to expect that Grace would know what losing control while intoxicated would do. The damage that could potentially be done to YUSU is not the fault of the voting students, if they decide as a body that they have no confidence in her fulfilling her role any more, but the person whose actions were so singularly ridiculous that they have caused this overblown incident.
From my personal experience Dan Taylor is the type to start a fight and instigate a reaction, even stooping to the level of racism in order to do so. In my view he deserves what he got.
I may be wrong, Kit Dixon, Halifax Treasurer 2008,, but the last time that censure was used for someone was for not calling the rules committee. There is a substantial difference between hitting someone in the head, and not calling rules committee, would you not agree? The fact of the matter is that this was intent to cause harm, and that apologies have been loaded with attempts to justify unjustifiable behaviour. As the A&W welfare rep she hit a student in her care in the face. Pure and simple. Great work may well have been done, but in this case, this isn't a simple matter of a mistake, this was the intent to cause physical harm to someone. And while you say that YUSU have not been drawn into it either way, the President has shown tacit support while another Sabb has shown explicit disapproval and agreement with the removal of Grace from her role.
Oh, and as a Tory you are appalled by the dragging of party politics and vicious smear campaigns? Ridiculous. There is a considerable amount of mud slinging been going on from both sides, not just Dan Taylor's, as you can see from people condoning this behaviour just above. When a sabbatical welfare rep hits a student, does that not in anyway relate to campus, is that a "private affair"?
47 - I have to say I find comments like that distinctly unhelpful. Grace would be the first person to urge people not to say things like that. I don't believe you can strike someone in the interests of justice.
The question is only whether it is the no confidence motion, or instead the motion of censure that would serve the interests of justice. Whether stripping someone of their job and going without a Welfare Officer is fair and an outcome prortionate to the actual incident.
comment deleted by the author
comment deleted by the author
comment deleted by the author Right, firstly on why I believe a motion of censure is more appropriate. A motion of censure by it's nature notes what has occured, and states the belief of the union that this is unacceptable, but not sufficient to warrant the removal of the officer involved. Comparing motions of censure is not fair, as the severity of the censure is dictated by the opening statements of what the Union Notes, and what the Union Believes. Thus this is still a valid way for the union to show disapproval without resorting to removing Grace from her position, and this motion carries much greater severity of censure than the one applied on a technical matter of rules committee.
On the issue of the right vs left nature of the motions presented; I'm dismayed by the way in which campus politics which should be detached from the incident has weighed in to the argument. As previous campus media articles have stated, this has ended up as a confrontation between the right and left of York; which make reasonable debate of the issue impossible (and yes I know there has been mud slinging from both sides). I applaud Dan Taylor for stating that this shouldn't be about political views of Grace, but still believe that he knew exactly what would happen when he took it to campus presses.
My comment that the matter should have remained a "private affair" may be a bit ambiguous, and I'll try to explain it. I'd put good money that the majority of people posting on this site have done things they deeply regret when under the influence of alcohol. I believe that the mature way to deal with incidents of this nature is in private with the person involved when they're sober. I think that Dan should have taken Grace's appology in good grace and left the matter there. Graces embarrassment would have surely served as sufficient punishment.
I stand by the crux of my defence of Grace, which is that she has done an exceptional job in various welfare roles within the union for many years, and I have total confidence in her ability to continue in her role. Furthermore there is no way in which the 'welfare-team' or sabbatical officers could take over her essential workload. It is notable that YUSU is currently undergoing a review of the areas where the strains on sabbatical officers are already too high; and from having worked in college welfare for some time now, I don't believe that the welfare system could cope without a YUSU sabbatical Ed-Welf Rep.
Guys,
I get the impression we are all rather going round in circles here, so I will say my own last word on the matter. The YUSU A&W Rep. hit a student. That is entirely incompatable with the position which she holds. I feel that she should resign, and on not doing so, the students should have the chanch to vote on 1) whether she holds any credibility in her position any more and 2) whether she should recognise that violent actions have consequences.
That is all.
Oh, and as someone who had their motion seconded by Czech, Tom Ruta, Italian Alexion Mantzarlis and Indian, Raessa Chouwdery, it hardly reeks of someone with closited racist inclings. Talk about a smear campaign. It is a load of rubbish.
Dan Taylor
41 - why are you posting anonymously if you have a serious problem about communications? How can I contact you to communicate with you? Send me an email or something, I don't bite!
I thought I had already made it clear why the YUSU Exec did not release a statement until Wednesday - because the YUSU Exec did not meet until Wednesday. I can't unilaterally decide our opinion on issues such as this, and neither can any of the other officers. Last year we didn't have this mad 24 hour news rush where people wanted comments whenever a story broke, and I don't have time to reply to every story as it happens. However, we did reply in good time and issued a full, clear statement.
Exec are not all full-time paid officers. Therefore, they can't be expected to drop everything for a meeting just to prepare a press release that could wait a couple of days.
Does that answer your points (again)? If not, please email - communications@yusu.org - and if you still don't think I did my job right, you can complain formally in writing to Matt, Anne-Marie or Grace as per the constitution. By all means copy your email on to this wall anonymously, but please don't expect me to keep replying on here (when for all I know you might not even be a YUSU member).
Thanks
Sam Bayley
Societies & Communications Officer
"This is not personal and if you choose to believe that it is, then that is your own ill-informed opinion based on no fact."
"It is not about 'right or left'. It is about what is right and what is wrong."
Dan Taylor #44
On Chloe Georgina Charlton's (fellow conservative) wall.....
Daniel D Taylor (London) wrote
at 9:01pm on February 1st, 2008
Drag them to their computers, do whatever it takes. This is our chance to get her! xxx
So there you go....
Not pesonal. Not political.
At last! The truth comes out! Like all thoughout this campaign Taylor has been undone through his own stupidity.
comment deleted by the author If you can find a single reference to Dan's personality in my speech against the no-confidence motion, I'd be happy to apologise for it.
Grace
For the comment, that is, not for Dan's personality...
But there was no such reference. I have never tried to claim that hitting Dan was acceptable. You should vote against the motion if you have the sense to see that the Union needs an Academic & Welfare Officer. That's all.
Grace again
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report