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.
The statements came in the wake of a second statement issued by the James JCRC to its students.
“When I first heard of the vote of no confidence I thought it was some horrible joke; after finding out it was not a joke I was outraged by the decision. Every meeting I have been in with Chet and every time I have had any discussions with him he has had James College's interests at heart; I feel that the James JCRC has made a mistake in taking him out of university politics as any college would be lucky to have a chair who will fight for their colleges cause as much as Chet does.
"Obviously I cannot comment on his approach to the James JCRC meetings but I am shocked at what I have heard based on what I have seen from Chet. It is a real shame and a genuine set-back to student politics at the University of York."
"It was genuinely a shock when I heard about Chet’s vote of no-confidence. From personal experience, he has proved himself to be dedicated, hard working and 100% in love with his college. He is constantly working to improve inter-college relationships and from what I’ve read, he has worked hard to fulfil his campaign promises. I, and I know quite a few other Derwenters, were green with envy that he managed to secure Sky for his common room!
"Being a chair isn’t the easiest; you put a lot of hard work behind the scenes that often goes overlooked. I can’t comment on his performance within his JCRC, but working with him was an absolute pleasure. Chet is enthusiastic, motivated and a great bloke and as said before, this is a complete loss to student politics."
"I support Chet's reinstatement because he has consistently shown himself to be an excellent chair. Not only has he worked hard (and successfully) to deliver the campaign promises that he made, but he has shown great commitment to working between colleges in order to improve the University for everyone, not just James students.
"Irrelevant of people's personal opinions, his role as Chair is to lead and in my experience with Chet he has done that admirably. The process used to remove him, though constitutional, was undemocratic in the extreme and makes a mockery of the people who work incredibly hard to improve the student experience. I believe that if reinstated Chet will continue to be a brilliant chair, and continue to make a huge difference to James students and to the wider University."
"Chet has been a valuable member of YUSU Senate, and consistently supported other JCR Chairs, always providing a helpful perspective and a powerful insight into the dynamics of campus democracy. I therefore found it difficult to understand the vote of no confidence that ousted him. Having said that, I can understand that there might be issues beyond my knowledge, which have shaped this outcome.
"As someone who is not a member of the James JCR, I have no say in this matter, but I would encourage the James JCRC to open up for greater discussion than has occurred thus far, as it is clear that there are many James members who were unaware of the developments, and would like to voice their opinions on the matter."
"Chet has done more for James College and for bringing colleges together than any of us thought possible in two terms. The amount of emails that have been going round from senior university staff, praising him, shows the amount of respect that he has from within the student political system.
"I feel that it's a flaw in the constitution that has allowed this vote to go through, something which should have been ironed out long ago. It seems like a very undemocratic process, especially considering the size of James College, the variety in views between its members and the fact that it wasn't conducted at an open meeting with a representative sample of James students. Instead it was at a meeting where only 18 people were there to vote on the motion, this represents little over 1% of the students in James. The constitution needs re-evaluating immediately and I fully believe that Chet was, and still could be a great asset to James College.
"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."
“Seeing a vote of no-confidence for any one of this year's college JCRC chairs would surprise me, but the removal of Chet absolutely astounding, and completely out of the blue.
"Chet has always come across as a true gentleman, and has always got the interests of his college at the forefront of his day-to-day life.
"Being a chair sometimes means doing things that you don't get any credit for - a lot of work goes on that is 'behind the scenes', and I have seen Chet go above and beyond for his college. I can only assume that those who have taken it upon themselves to remove him are unaware of the amount of work that Chet was doing on their behalf."
I was speaking to some James students today, and they all said he was well liked by his college. Very strange business indeed.
I have to say that I don't think it is a question of whether or not he was 'well liked' rather whether he was fulfilling his role as chair and supporting his committee at a college level - the second press release from the JCRC clearly indicates that he was not.
The only one of these comments I support is Erik O'Conner's. The others talk about all the good Chet has done at Senate and a University level, but apart from Erik's, none of them seem to accept that its possible he might not have been quite so good on a college level.
I know no details, or whether this is true or not, but it seems to me that Chet was too concerned with representing his college, that he forgot to listen to what it was his college actually wanted. The mark of a good chair is someone who can represent what his college wants, and talk to people at every level. It doesn't seem Chet did this.
Furthermore, a Chairs first and foremost concern is the welfare and smooth running of his college. Although its all very well to get sky tv for your JCR (and all credit to Chet for that), surely it's far more important to firstly put your time and effort into making sure that your college as a whole is working well.
It seems to be Chet lost sight of what his job was, and as so deserved some form of retribution. I'm not sure that a no-confidence vote is the best way to do that, and I definitely don't support one done in the way this one was carried out.
However, I don't support the college chairs undying loyalty to Chet. The JCRC did what they did for a reason, and the Chairs need to accept that, no matter how good a friend Chet is.
What did the tables have to say?
Firstly, no credit to Chet for getting the Sky. James got sky tv as compensation for not having a bar, along with Halifax. It was offered not "gained".
Secondly, Chet was and is well liked. I personally like him very much. Yet that doesn't change my objective opinion of his failure in his job.
Thirdly, I think the main problem Chet suffered was his experience in the past as a union rep (I think I am right in saying that?). He thought he could do bigger and better things than he could and when he appeared to find out that he was not in a position to do those things, neglected to care about the smaller issues (for example, small run college events and parties). Chet wanted to do big things, when he couldn't... he didn't want to do anything at all.
...and isn't it interesting that it's almost entirely men who are supporting him? I think there's more to this than meets the eye.
It's entirely men because it's mainly his mates. They are too narrow minded to be objective and see the real story and what is best for the college.
I don't think he is a bad guy though... he is a bit intimidating but I think he is a nice guy underneath. A lot of people like him but that doesn't make him a good chair.
To me this is simply a case of he was in the wrong job... he wasn't good at it. A chair needs to be approachable and always willing to make sacrifices to help, not weedling out of things and putting up barriers, which is what he did.
Since I am not a member of James College, and have no particular opinion of the rights and wrongs of this case, I have to say I am finding this very funny, for the most part, particularly the amateur dramatics of everyone involved. However, two issues are really annoying me.
The first is the insistence that the decision by James JCRC was 'undemocratic'. It was not undemocratic, but an example of representative democracy - the JCRC was elected by the James College electorate as a whole to represent their interests on the Committee, and so (theoretically) had the power of the entire electorate behind it in all decisions it made - including decisions to remove one of its own.
Secondly, this insistence by several of the Chairs (including the ci-devant Chair of James himself) that James JCRC doesn't realise how much the man does or how stupid they have been in removing him is rather irritating. The majority of the committee he led voted that it had no confidence in his leadership. Whatever their reasons for this, they will realise the impact and will have given the issue a lot of thought before voting to sack him; so whether or not they have actually been stupid, I somehow doubt they are unaware of any such stupidity (I also suspect that the committee Chet actually worked with knows rather more about how successful he has been in chairing it than Zach Pepper and Joe Clarke).
On the other hand, I find the idea of Chet being reinstated hilarious. Given that both he and James JCRC have made it clear how little each thinks of the other, it would be wildly amusing to see him put back in charge of it, just to see them tear each other to pieces. 
Very, very well said.
#7
#8 Possibly the most sense I've heard since this whole debacle kicked off!
Briefly on the topic of 'senior members of staff praising Chet's work'...
Perhaps so, but these are the same staff who not so long ago tried to REMOVE HIM FROM HIS POSITION THEMSELVES. After the strippergate affair his provost - in consultation with pro-vice chancellors and other senior staff - all considered ousting Chet as chair themselves by stripping him (sorry for the pun) of his college membership.
And on another note, rather than hear what other chairs think (which is predictably that chairs should not be no-confidenced!) I would rather hear what Anne-Marie Canning thinks. After all, she's our YUSU pres and she was also James college chair.
comment deleted by a moderator Anne marie's views don't mean anything on this. Yes she is YUSU president but seems to be moving further and further away from the students views with every meeting she attends.
She seems to have forgotten the college chair days and now she is so caught up in her own little world and seems to be ignorant to the fact that she is essentially a student (even if it is a recently graduated one) who just needs to look after students. She is not a politician, but I don't think she realises that.
I'm sure her perspective as a college chair is long since forgotten.
I don't want to sound patronising, but I have worked with Anne-marie very closely and I can tell you categorically that you are talking complete and utter bullshit.
I hate Chet more than my own pitiful life.
but why?! he likes you...
If posts are altered or deleted by moderators, couldn't they say why? I don't see what was wrong with no. 6 and would be interested to know why it was changed.
comment deleted by a moderator I don't think anyone has the right to slate Anne-Marie - there is nothing in life that irritates me more than ignorance.
comment deleted by the author You must log in to submit a comment.
Report