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.
Khatu, the surprise winner in the elections, was subject to a no-confidence vote by the JCRC at 7pm on Wednesday 18th June, and as such is no longer Chair of James College.
The motion, which was first on the agenda, was proposed by the Press and Publicity officer, Jonathon Caunce. He cited "leadership issues" as the reason for dismissal.
A Statement released on Thursday morning said: "We would like to reiterate that this decision was taken purely on professional grounds, and should not be viewed as a personal attack in any way towards Chet Khatu."
The voting, conducted by position rather than person, saw a final vote of 10-2 with 1 person abstaining.
The college's constitution, unlike all others, requires no notice or quoracy to be met. Colleges such as Goodricke require 4% of the college's population to be at a pre-determined meeting. However, the James JCRC constitution simply states:
"A vote must then be taken (by position) whilst the officer is vacant of the room. A simple majority will remove the officer(s) from the committee."
The post will now remain open until a replacement can be elected. Khatu was downbeat about the decision, as there is no appeals process in place.
In his Statement to The Yorker he said: "It seems ridiculous that mob rule has prevailed in what is supposed to be an all accommodating democratic system."
Goodricke Chair Joe Clarke said of the decision: "Chet has done more for that committee and for bringing colleges together than any Chair could have. The amount of emails that have been going round from people as senior as Elizabeth Heaps [Pro-Vice Chancellor] praising him show the amount of respect that he has from Senior University Staff."
He had big ideas for James College, and the University as a whole. He'll be a loss to student politics.
He said it was a "ridiculous decision" and added: "I'm not sure on a committee level if they can hold it together. It seemed to me that Chet was doing that."
Clarke added: "I'm going to bring it up at our open meeting tomorrow night, and we [Goodricke College] will be re-evaluating our involvement with them over Freshers Week."
He issued a plea to James students to attend meetings and make their opinions heard. "It's time for the students to get in touch with their JCRC, go to the meetings, and let the committee know that they're outraged."
The process by which he was removed is set to come under dispute. Clarke said: "I think it's a flaw in the constitution. It's the most undemocractic decision ever been made, the fact it can be done at a closed JCR meeting, and only 10 positions, out of a college of however many people can vote is just undemocratic. The consitution needs re-evaluating immediately."
The timing of the move is thought to be critical as colleges are organising Freshers Week.
Langwith Chair Zach Pepper said: "Chet's a great guy and a good mate of mine. He had big ideas for James College, and the University as a whole. He'll be a loss to student politics."
College Constitutions were expected to be one of the changes under the forthcoming Governance review of YUSU.
In the past month Khatu had successfully negiotated a Sky TV Package for the JCR as well use of the Roger Kirk Centre as an events venue for the college.
YUSU President Anne-Marie Canning said: "The JCRC have conducted themselves impeccably with regards to following the constitution, a constitution passed by James College students."
She added: "I believe James College have had a difficult year but I have absolute faith that the team of three vice chairs will prove to be very successful in leading the college activities."
Anna Maughan, a third year James student said: "It seems like a harsh decision, as Chair he seems to have made a lot of progress for James students."
#60 it depends of the James constitution, whether the vice-chairs take over or wether there is a by-election, being a fellow Halifaxer I don't know which will occur.
#59 I agree the no-confidence proceedure is shambolic, we have a system similar to Alcuins in Halifax, and whilst I personally feel a GM vote should be taken to remove a major officer, I certainly agree that a cooling-off period should be in place for motions of no-confidence.
#57 Having sat on the constitution committee for Halifax, I'd point out that certain positions are not deemed more important, but that other positions require more people because they have a larger workload. For example Sport in Halifax would have 8 votes on the committee, giving it twice as much say as the president, vice-presidents, and treasurer. In order to balance the various representations on college JCRCs it is common for shared positions to only hold one vote.
I think that the various college constitutions could probably do with a shake-up, especailly with the changes in charity law coming into force in October. A meeting of college chairs, and YUSU probably should be arranged to iron out the inconsistencies, especially where college and YUSU constitution meet.
I suspect that rather than a by-election, the responsibilities will be taken over by the vice chairs.
Even if he were to re-stand and be re-elected, it's questionable whether he'd be able to work well with a JCRC, the majority of whom clearly don't want him. (And to reiterate the point - it was 12 JCRC positions that voted against him, not 12 individuals).
The changes in charity laws don't really affect JCRCs because they aren't charities in their own right. They're part of the colleges, which are part of the university. (Note they are not part of YUSU). As they're not a legal entity in their own right, they don't need a trustee board. Ultimate responsibility for their liabilities is taken on by the college. So for example if they were sued, or got into a load of debt, it's the college/university that takes ultimate responsibility, not the JCRC nor any individuals on the JCRC.
YUSU on the other hand is an independent legal entity. If it gets sued, its trustees are screwed.
Quad dash - as far as I saw, he spent the entire day in his hammock doing nothing. There have been less James college event's this year than ever, that is a fact.
And as for other college chairs supporting him - when Oliver Lester, who is blatantly the least politically active (and concentrates on his own students) say's anything good about him, maybe then I'll change my opinion. I certainly won't pay much attention to a chair whose committee just lost nearly £3000 in the last week.
As it stands, bloody well done James College JCRC - you've made a brilliant decision and I'm sure you're incoming freshers will profit from it!
I would like to clarify for those who are concerned:
There is no intention to replace the college chair due to it being so late in his term.
The vote was not 12 people as the constitution states that voting must take place per position and positions can hold up to 4 persons. Therefore, one vote can represent up to 4 opinions.
Personally I also think this needs changing in the constitution as it is equally undemocratic to have one vote (eg, for positions with one person) therefore one persons opinion counting for a whole vote and another opinion only counting for a quarter of it.
comment deleted by the author Could I just ask how many people were actually present in the positions that voted in favour and against the motion. I.e. was it 30 people in favour and 5 against etc? I know it's one vote per position but were there more than one person per position there?
Also, what is the quoracy for the James JCRC, just out of curiosity?
I just want to say that as an ex-Ents Officer, I worked with Chet on a number of occasions and always found him to be professional, committed to his college and passionate about his job. I don't know the ins and outs of why this motion was brought forward, but I do know that Chet always fought hard for James College whenever he had the chance to do so.
It is a shame that James College JCR have decided to do this now when it is no doubt busy making preparations for it’s busiest time of the year re: Fresher’s Week. I know Chet was very much involved in these preparations (from the conversations I’ve had with him) and I hope James’ new batch of Fresher’s will not suffer as a result of this decision.
Finally, to those who attempt to belittle student politics completely miss the point, and it is often those that do belittle it that are so often the first to complain when student ‘politicians’ don’t act on their behalf. Those that get involved in student politics largely do so because they want a make difference to student’s lives, whether that’s in the form of welfare, events, academia or sport. Of course people make mistakes, but let’s not forget why they are involved in it in the first place; they take on the extra responsibility, the extra stress and hassle because they want to make life at York Uni better. A lot of the work that they do is done behind the scenes in committee rooms and university offices and is very rarely reported. It is only when things go wrong or people make mistakes that the press becomes interested.
I apologise if this has become a bit of a rant, but situations like these are infuriating. I love this university, and part of the reason I do is that we have so many levels of elected representatives who try and make college/university life better by giving up their own time and energy. If we go around no-confidencing anyone who makes a mistake or doesn’t conform to the traditional stereotype of an elected official, then very soon people will lose interest in standing for these important positions at all. If you’re not happy with the way someone is doing a job, then discuss it with them and try and help them through it. Simply trying to remove them from their position doesn’t do anyone any favours.
"Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears; I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him"
However respectably Chet has behaved in regard to Senate and University Committees, he has not always carried this through to the JCRC. I would like to emphasise that this is not a decision the JCRC have taken lightly, they have struggled with the issue since early in Chet's term of being chair. This is has been long considered, and Chet has been told previously of the feelings of the JCRC, in order to give him chance to react and improve his conduct in respect to the JRCR and events. However, he does not seem to have done, Quad Dash was an example of this.
I would also like to point out to #67 in regard to Fresher's Week - "I know Chet was very much involved in these preparations (from the conversations I’ve had with him)". I will repeat what has been said before - Chet has not been to a single Fresher's meeting, where ALL Fresher's Week related business is discussed. I don't know what Chet himself feels his involvement was, but it certainly was not obvious to the other members of the JCRC.
In response to the anonymity question - I am a member of the JCRC posting anonymously because I feel intimidated by Chet, and I know I am not alone in this. If the JRCR cannot comfortably talk to their Chair then this shows there is a serious problem.
I would like to commend Chet for the time and commitment that he has put into James College, but the time has come where it seems the JRCR would run more smoothly if he were not present.
im in agreement to #70- chet should be thanked for what he did do for the college, but this decision was not taken lightly and had been coming for some time.
If members of the jcrc and college feel intimidated by chet, to the extent that they feel they cannot reveal their identities on sites like this- then that says a lot. A committee needs to work together- not feel intimdated by the person that is leading them.
I feel the people who are criticising the actions of the jcrc do not know or understand the full extent of the situation.
#20 gives full explanation of why this has occurred and that, alongside the statement from the jcrc itself should be enough to clarify why Chet has been removed from his position of chair.
I'm also a member of the JCR, and in all honesty he did absolutely nothing for James, and I'm pleased that he's gone.
Who is going to represent James on Senate now? Since apparently he was pretty respected on them, I wouldn't want to be the person who has to go from a committee that ousted him. Not that I think senate would be unprofessional about it, but it might cause some tension.
I understand all the arguments that the JCRC are putting across, but can they not see that the way they did this was unprofessional and disrespectful, even if it was deserved?
its already been outlined that the remaining executive members of the committee will work together to fill in the role of chair.
I'm a chair get me out of here. Oh, you did 
Can't say I am too impressed by this.
I think it is a disgrace that as a James student, we had absolutely no idea about the vote of no confidence, nor the outcome until a press release, the same as received by The Yorker, forwarded from The Press And Publicity Officer via the College Secretary arrived in our Email at 10.02 this morning. We haven't had a personal response, reasons for dismissal or anything similar from the JCRC as to why this motion was passed. (Other than anonymous comments on here)
As a first year, I have bared witness to two James College Chairs, Chet and Alex Clarke. All I can say is that most people know of Chet, be it good or bad... but to the contrary we had very little if any knowledge of Alex, outside of the introductions in Freshers' Week. This, I believe reflects well on Chet, whom could always be seen in and about James, speaking to the people of his College and extracting their opinions.
I think there really should be some sort of appeal process, or at least a complaint made by James students for the undemocratic and unrepresentative dismissal of the Chair of our college.
Just a point to all these 'anon' posts commenting how good it is that Cet went: Stop being so bloody spineless, man-up and have your opinions as yourself. If you choose to put the daggers in, do it from the front.
I don't know the ins and outs of this- it's probably a good thing he went reading and hearing what I have in the last 24 hours, but if you have an opinion, express it as yourself. Not cowardly.
It does sound like the members of the JCR have undertaken a coup to remove what appears to be a succesful member of the committee, by using a loophole in their constitution. I think the first thing to do would be to amend the constitution to have a more rigourous procedure for such instances of no confidence.
Also the only reason which has been touted about is "leadership issues" sounds like there is more to it. Is it possible to get hold of the minutes for said meeting?
Actually, some of these 'anon' posts about him are frankly disgusting having read through a few more. There really are some spineless people out there. And cut the crap about it being a 'hard decision' and 'fearing for reprecussions'. Personally insulting someone who clearly has done some good for James (he got you bloody SKY- fancy giving it to us now?!) is pretty below the belt. Now he has gone, be honourable with the result.
I think a bit of anonymity should be respected at this point Dan, its a particularly sensitive topic and as such remaining anonymous will prevent comments being seen as a personal attack against Chet.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report