New Strategy for Student Unions (1 Viewer)

[iamsickofyear12]

Voluntary Student Unionism does not mean Ban on Student Unionism. If the Student Union's stopped wasting time complaining about VSU and wasting money protesting it they might be able to convince people to continue their membership. I don't like the Student Union at UOW, I don't think I am benefiting at all from the money I pay but if they showed me differently I might reconsider.

I have decided it would be a good idea to propse a different strategy to the current 'complain and protest' strategy current being employed by Student Unions everywhere.

Step 1: Stop complaining about VSU.

Step 2: Stop protesting VSU (no amount of protesting is going to change anything)

Step 3: Use the money that was going to be spent protesting to:

a) Make a list of all the free stuff people get from student unionism.

b) Make a list of all the subsidised stuff people get from student unionism. And that doesn't mean just say 'The Unishop' and 'The Unibar', it means make a list of the things they sell like 'chips' and 'beer' and 'mars bars'.

Saying the 'prices at the unibar will increase' means absolutely nothing to me. Tell me the 'chips will increase by $1.20' and that means something to me. If you give people a detailed list of the items that they regularly purchase they can work out how much they are saving.

c) Get a sample of students, and by sample I don't mean a shitload of people who use every single union service that exists I mean some people who use a lot of them, some people who use a moderate amount and some people that use very few. That was people will be able to quickly tell what kind of benefits they are getting.

Step 4: Take all the information and put it into an information booklet and distribute it to students.

I know that if I had this information and I worked out that I was actually better off I would support the student union. The student unions are trying to claim that student don't want to be a part of union because they are 'anti-unions' when it is actually because they are 'anti-pay money for stuff they don't use'.

------------------------------------
This plan might not save the student unions, but there is a better chance of it working than protesting because protesting is leading absolutely nowhere and I don't know why a lot of people can't see that.
------------------------------------

I don't know why the student unions aren't doing this already. It makes absolutely no sense. There is only one reason I can think of that is stopping them and that is that they don't actually benefit students as much as they say they do and so this plan I am proposing would prove what everyone has been thinking all along. And now that I think about it, I am pretty sure that this is the case.

 

[Generator]

Public-Choice Theory... Why didn't I read about that before I decided to waltz with this particular topic .

 

[Phanatical]

But the thing is that they're ideologically opposed to VSU. This means they won't even look at practical ways to promote USU, because it should be obvious to everybody that it's nothing more than a way for the "Fucking Liberal Scum" to oppress us.

 

[hfis]

Apparently "Student rights are NOT voluntary". According to their T-Shirts, anyway.

Yes, how dare we have a choice. It's fucking barbaric. I, for one, would like to know what these hippies are smoking and where I can get some.

As other people have said, just wait until next year. The unions will do their utmost to fuck up everything and shun the students, then be all like "LOL LOOK WHAT TEH VSU DID FUK U HAHAHA".

SUPPORT FREEDOM
SUPPORT CHOICE
SUPPORT VSU

Or maybe I'm just fucking insane? I mean, if I support VSU, we'll lose the 'queer space'. OH SHIT NO! I'll tell you what WUSA, I'll start caring when I have a fucking straight space.

Bloody communists.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Or maybe I'm just fucking insane? I mean, if I support VSU, we'll lose the 'queer space'. OH SHIT NO! I'll tell you what WUSA, I'll start caring when I have a fucking straight space.

If there was a straight space the fags would be going off about discrimination, which is bullshit but thats exactly what would happen.

 

[Lexicographer]

Sigh. I have received post reports for the language in this thread. Yeah yeah, I know it's not much harsher than normal, and the topic itself isn't so fanciable, but please tone it down?

I don't like the way this thread will go if it stays here, so I'm moving it to NCAP. I wash my hands yadda yadda.

Moved

 

[ogmzergrush]

A nice, simple strategy would be to focus on spending the money they have on universally *useful* things, and not using it in ways which alienate segments of the student body which they claim to represent, then I'd imagine the vast majority of people wouldn't have cause to consider not being members anyway.

 

[Xayma]

If there was a straight space the fags would be going off about discrimination, which is bullshit but thats exactly what would happen.

Except the queer space (in difference to womens space etc) is used becase the vast majority of queer's feel isolation and other such problems.

On that note, go for a straight space, I don't see how it would be of any use to anyone.

I am actually more in favour of a nondiscriminate sexuality officer, who could handle issues like pregnancy and how its dealth with inside the university (don't say the womens officer can handle that as males also often go through having a gf etc pregnant) as well as queer related issues.

 

[Rorix]

They don't want to do that because they're moving the masses with claims like 'save our student organisations!' and 'save union buildings!' which shouldn't really be under threat anyway.

At USYD, anyway.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

It won't happen... ever.
The union will fight a bloody battle even once VSU is implemented. You have to understand, to them, this is a true fight of good vs evil.

 

[transcendent]

I think the number of USU/VSU debate threads is really getting out of hand.

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I think the number of USU/VSU debate threads is really getting out of hand.

I agree with that, although I made this thread seperate because the other threads are all just people arguing about VSU, and no one is really thinking about possibilties for student unions to exist in the future.

 

[frog12986]

Damn choice and democracy...why would we want either... COMMUNISM FOREVER

 

[llamalope]

ok this is how i see it. I may be right, or I may be wrong, who knows.

I personally would pay my union fees anyway if vsu was introduced. However I know that people would not want to pay their fees, but would still want to use the union services...and because nobody pays their fees, the services would shut down. Therefore nobody would pay because people don't want to pay for something that may not exist because of a mass distrust in the willingness of people to pay.

I see union fees like taxes. Nobody wants to pay taxes. However, just because you dislike taxes doesn't mean they should be voluntary. Taxes pay for things that everybody has the capacity to use, like roads and hospitals and air traffic control...but you personally may not use them. Therefore you have the choice to use something or not to use something...but you do not have a choice as to whether you pay for it. I think union fees are a little bit like that. We all want to derive the benefit from the services that the union provides, but we don't want to pay for them. One day you may actually need that childcare, or the legal advice (whether you don't at the moment is irrelevent). One day you may feel the need to play union sport, believe it or not.

Because nobody will want to pay their union fees, no money will be available for the upkeep of manning, or wentworth or holme which are essentially UNION buildings. So everybody should have to pay equally, regardless of whether you choose to use the facilities or not. It is your choice not to play union sport... but like taxes, everybody should bear the brunt equally. Yes it is unfair. Yes it is expensive...but so are taxes

that's just my opinion

 

[withoutaface]

Except the queer space (in difference to womens space etc) is used becase the vast majority of queer's feel isolation and other such problems.

On that note, go for a straight space, I don't see how it would be of any use to anyone.

I am actually more in favour of a nondiscriminate sexuality officer, who could handle issues like pregnancy and how its dealth with inside the university (don't say the womens officer can handle that as males also often go through having a gf etc pregnant) as well as queer related issues.

While that may be true, for certain people I'm sure that they would use the room as their exclusive source of social contact, ignoring the people outside of the queer space, thus causing continued isolation and a lack of motivation to combat it. That's the way I see it anyway...

 

[iamsickofyear12]

I see union fees like taxes. Nobody wants to pay taxes. However, just because you dislike taxes doesn't mean they should be voluntary. Taxes pay for things that everybody has the capacity to use, like roads and hospitals and air traffic control...but you personally may not use them. Therefore you have the choice to use something or not to use something...but you do not have a choice as to whether you pay for it. I think union fees are a little bit like that. We all want to derive the benefit from the services that the union provides, but we don't want to pay for them. One day you may actually need that childcare, or the legal advice (whether you don't at the moment is irrelevent). One day you may feel the need to play union sport, believe it or not.

So you are saying people don't want to pay union fees just because they don't want to pay union fees. That doesn't really make any sense, because if people were actually benefiting then they would want to pay.

The reason people don't want to pay is because:
1. they either don't think they are getting their money's worth
2. they don't know if they are getting their money's worth.

And instead of trying to inform people about their personal benefits through what I mentioned in the first post they just list what the university gains in general. And nobody cares what the university gains in general.

And if one day you needed the union services, you could use all the money you have saved from not paying voluntary union fees to pay for it.

 

[Rorix]

I personally would pay my union fees anyway if vsu was introduced. However I know that people would not want to pay their fees, but would still want to use the union services...and because nobody pays their fees, the services would shut down.

Most of the services which you actually use on a regular basis are profitable or have the potental to be profitable with no downgrading of the service or are not sufficiently expensive to not be covering by fixed income such as rent from union buldings. The most expensive services are ones that the majority of people rarely if ever use.

[qupte]Because nobody will want to pay their union fees, no money will be available for the upkeep of manning, or wentworth or holme which are essentially UNION buildings. [/QUOTE]

For example, in 2003, the Union generated approx $1,400,000 from rent of these union buildings. Compare this with the expense on clubs and societies (500,000) and the net loss on catering (900,000) which I presume includes all the 'free' BBQs etc.. Also see the union net profit for the year, $2,000,000 out of $24,000,000 gross revenue.

 

[Curry]

The reason people don't want to pay is because:
1. they either don't think they are getting their money's worth
2. they don't know if they are getting their money's worth.

Or because they know that they are not getting their money's worth.

 

[Korn]

ok this is how i see it. I may be right, or I may be wrong, who knows.

I personally would pay my union fees anyway if vsu was introduced. However I know that people would not want to pay their fees, but would still want to use the union services...and because nobody pays their fees, the services would shut down. Therefore nobody would pay because people don't want to pay for something that may not exist because of a mass distrust in the willingness of people to pay.

I see union fees like taxes. Nobody wants to pay taxes. However, just because you dislike taxes doesn't mean they should be voluntary. Taxes pay for things that everybody has the capacity to use, like roads and hospitals and air traffic control...but you personally may not use them. Therefore you have the choice to use something or not to use something...but you do not have a choice as to whether you pay for it. I think union fees are a little bit like that. We all want to derive the benefit from the services that the union provides, but we don't want to pay for them. One day you may actually need that childcare, or the legal advice (whether you don't at the moment is irrelevent). One day you may feel the need to play union sport, believe it or not.

Because nobody will want to pay their union fees, no money will be available for the upkeep of manning, or wentworth or holme which are essentially UNION buildings. So everybody should have to pay equally, regardless of whether you choose to use the facilities or not. It is your choice not to play union sport... but like taxes, everybody should bear the brunt equally. Yes it is unfair. Yes it is expensive...but so are taxes

that's just my opinion

If u want to use the services u should be required to pay. Anyways what are the services anyways like what are the specifics or where can I find out

 

[iamsickofyear12]

Or because they know that they are not getting their money's worth.

Well yeah I kind of mean that in the first one.