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.
Voting on the motions closed at 4pm on Wednesday, and the results were published on the YUSU website shortly afterwards. With a Campaigns Committee meeting scheduled for 5pm that day, the result of the portering motion was top of the agenda. In light of the motion being passed, YUSU Campaigns Officers Chris Etheridge and Jason Rose asked the committee to discuss different ways the union can campaign; these options will be put to Union Council next week.
Layram was present, and read out a statement he had prepared before knowing the results of the UGM. Layram discussed the list of incidents on campus that YUSU are preparing, and expressed the belief that more energy should be put into compiling this list. He wanted the union to ensure greater awareness of the portering@yusu.org email address, and to seek clarification on what the university is looking for from this list.
Layram suggested that the union needs to know what would constitute incontrovertible evidence that portering would have affected the incidents YUSU are keeping a record of. YUSU Welfare Officer Ben Humphrys agreed, suggesting that the union needs broad parameters. Humphrys added that he would be speaking to students in Vanbrugh and Derwent to get their thoughts and feelings, and raise awareness. He also suggested that the union could put pressure on key individuals on university council, to try and get these individuals on YUSU's side.
YUSU President Tim Ngwena noted that he was in the process of designing a portering business card, to raise awareness and list key phone numbers along with the portering email address. He also raised the point that it was crucial to pick up the pace of the campaign at the start of next term, to ensure that momentum is not lost.
Other suggestions put forward at Campaigns Committee included contacting well-known university alumni to try and get their support for YUSU's campaign, and to organise a debate to raise interest. Rose and Etheridge will put these different ideas to Union Council next week, and the council will then vote on what they think is the best course of action.
The portering campaign will no doubt be heavily debated again at Council, given the division of opinion Layram's motion appears to have caused. Though Derwent Vice-Chair Anna Claire Younger seconded the motion, and Halifax President Roberto Powell spoke in favour of it at the UGM, Ngwena and Humphrys spoke against the motion. YUSU LGBT Officer Peter Warner-Medley, YUSU Environment and Ethics Officer David Clarke and Chemistry student Matt Bailey also spoke against the motion, and Clarke was behind a Facebook campaign encourage students to "Vote No to First Stage".
With more students voting on the portering motion than any other motion, and 39% of those students voting against the motion, it is clear that Layram has his opponents as well as his supporters. However with the motion passed, YUSU officers are now mandated to support the motion regardless of their feelings towards it.
Seven other motions were submitted at the UGM – including two resubmissions from the last UGM after an error in calculating quoracy. All the motions were passed, although Nightline's motion to be included in Union Council was also closely contested, after YUSU Democracy and Services Officer Lewis Bretts had spoken against it.
Reforming Equality, Welfare, and Diversity (EWD) Committee: 293 for, 35 against, 74 abstaining
Create a YUSU Disability Committee: 327 for, 60 against, 45 abstaining
Include Nightline in Union Council: 284 for, 113 against, 38 abstaining
Campaign to Reinstate Portering Hours: First Stage: 393 for, 253 against, 17 abstaining
Your YUSU, Your Officers, Your Information: 314 for, 33 against, 57 abstaining
RESUBMISSION: Annual Constitutional Tidy Up: 271 for, 29 against, 80 abstaining
RESUBMISSION: Proposal to change 'Student Action' to 'YUSU Volunteering: Student Action in the Community': 293 for, 64 against, 73 abstaining
Ratification of Union Council Minutes (18th Mar, 6th & 20th May, 17th Jun, 21st Oct): 242 for, 19 against, 117 abstaining
For more details on the motions, click here.
Yawn
I do hope everyone who is complaining voted.
#20 - This is being done at the moment. YUSU is compiling a dossier of specific evidence on how the loss of portering is detrimental to student welfare. This is separate to the motion, though I believe the people behind the motion also support the dossier.
About point 4 in the motion - if YUSU Sabbs are prepared to just not do the rest of the motion, why would they obey the bit about no confidencing themselves?
Anna Younger and Roberto Powell's performance on their respective JCRC/Halifax equivalent aren't related to this motion. Please don't band around meaningless no confidence motions. Either way, I think both Anna and Roberto have now stepped down after serving for a year in the recent College elections.
#14 - will you be submitting a motion to the UGM then?
#20: Yes, there have been situations that porters have averted over the last few years. Yes, there have been rapes and other attacks on campus over the last few years. Those two facts alone should indicate the worth of porters around campus.
In terms of the specific details; we're compiling a dossier with examples. If you have any, email portering@yusu.org and we'll add them. The problems with giving figures are that they won't always be 100% accurate as many attacks, etc, won't be reported - and also individual student welfare has to be thought of when informing people about campus issues. But the point of the dossier is to explain those sort of issues and give real-life examples. It'll be public and advertised, too, so keep an eye out for that next term!
Which incidents have porters prevented?
more accurately, which incidents have porters prevented that could not have been prevented by campus security?
Porters, in the porter's lodge, are surely away from areas in which students are most likely to be attacked? Wouldn't a better campaign be to have CCTV installed in danger areas, that can be monitered by campus security?
#24, it's more useful and easy to find arguments of the reverse, i.e. which incidents have occurred due to lower portering levels. Like Jason said, if you're aware of any, email portering@yusu.org. Also, incident prevention is only a part of the porters' job.
#26, CCTV is in many of these danger areas. There are some 300+ cameras on campus. The fact is that it's already extremely difficult for security to monitor them all. The point of the campaign is that people know where porters are. With CCTV, there is no guarantee that a camera is being monitored. Patrolling campus is covered by security. The argument is simply that in addition to this, we need to know exactly where one member of staff is in each college, 24 hours a day. That is where porters come in.
On the CCTV front, Derwent bar is covered by CCTV. Did security notice all the furniture being removed? Exactly.
"which incidents have porters prevented that could not have been prevented by campus security" - I can't imagine any scenario, ever, in which there is an incident that porters could prevent that could NOT, under any circumstances, be stopped by other individuals... The difference is that there are *plenty* that are more likely to be stopped by porters and fewer that are stopped by security.
What are the advantages of security staff other than the rapid-response-car? Both have advantages but security don't fulfil many of the roles including the one of having a base in every college, which is fundamental!
why?
The porters were never 24 hours anyway... They left the desk a lot of the time, and we used the red phone anyway.
You must log in to submit a comment.
Report