College JCRC Chairs have spoken out in unison against what they view as a highly restrictive system of hiring technical equipment for college events, and its effects on both college finance and college spirit. The situation has been labelled as “crippling for college finances, unsustainable for our college’s campus events and bars, and incredibly restrictive in terms of the ideas JCRCs want to pull off,” by Vanbrugh’s Chair, Kallum Taylor, his sentiments echoed by his six colleagues.
The problem stems from the fact that colleges are currently operating under a YUSU contract with equipment provider JSS/TSS. This means that whenever colleges want to put on events of a certain size, they have to go through JSS/TSS for light and sound, as well as using, and paying for, appropriately trained staff to handle it.
The running of colleges is technically not under the remit of the Student Union, and is in fact the responsibility of the University. Despite this, the University has not been willing to provide the relevant equipment and staff training needed, for reasons of cost and liability. In light of this, colleges have had no other choice than to go through YUSU and JSS/TSS when wanting to put on events.
The Chairs argue that the main problem with the current contract is that, though relatively competitive, it is still too costly. The minimum package deal offered costs around £800, forcing college committees to set high and uncompetitive tickets prices just to break even.
James Chair Emma Bartlett explains that the minimum package includes more equipment than is necessary to put on an event in James Hall. “The equipment that we get is far bigger than we need and in effect we are paying well over what we need to as there is no lower package.
“James Hall has a capacity of 400 people, so even if we were able to fill it to full capacity we would have to charge everyone £2 to turn up to an event with a massive sound system but no decorations or extras.”
Meanwhile, Halifax President Davedass Mootanah adds that, “from a college’s perspective, it is unfair to charge high ticket prices for running an event on campus in order to cover high fixed costs of equipment as it will reduce the demand of an event and incur a higher risk of the JCRC making a financial loss on the event.”
Derwent, which doesn’t have a built-in speaker system in their bar, has to fork out over £1000 pounds for every event they put on. This means that even the traditionally popular Club D events are suffering under the current scheme. “For my JCRC to break even at one Club D we need to sell 270 tickets at £4, which is not a competitive price,” says Chair Matt Jenkins.
The issue of high ticket prices directly leads onto the issue of the chronically underused campus bars. “It not only restricts our capacity for putting on professional looking events and increasing ticket sales,” says Lizzie Bartholomew, the Alcuin Chair, “but it in turn restricts bar sales which directly affects Commerical Services and causes bar closures – which they blame us for.”
She is backed up by the Goodricke Chair, Nacho Hernando, despite the college’s lack of bar. He comments that “such high prices discourage students from consuming drinks in our campus bars, which is why we have most bars in a situation where they are breaking even or even making losses. Campus bars therefore are not happy to agree to late licenses for events knowing that they are going to lose money.”
All colleges own a certain amount of equipment that they have ready at hand. However, under the current contract, they are not allowed to pool their equipment together and share it. Vanbrugh experienced the harsh realities of this recently, when only 5 days prior to their Battle of the Bands event, they were informed that they couldn’t use other colleges’ equipment.
“We bit the bullet on this; partly to not turn our back on an exciting, different kind of event for a good cause, and partly to expose the sheer ridiculousness of the status quo,” commented Taylor.
“Luckily, we’ve since clawed the money back via sponsorship. It really shouldn’t be that much of a hassle or cost to host such events.”
One college that has a lot of equipment to spare is Langwith, and Chair Cem Turhan is frustrated that they can’t share it. He says, “We are not allowed to lend equipment out at the minute, which is really affecting the returns of other events on campus. If bars start to close down and events begin to monopolise, college spirit will become atrocious.”
The Chairs believe that on-campus events are crucial to maintaining college spirit and that under the current situation the colleges are suffering not only financially but in terms of atmosphere as well.
“We are a team of JCRC chairs who are regularly being told that the University wants to improve the college system and YUSU are bringing in a full time JCRC co-ordinator position,” says Jenkins.
“Why then do they seem to offer absolutely no support for college events? The very thing that helps to strike up and maintain a college spirit which makes York unique to most university experiences is something that high equipment costs is currently killing off.”
Bartlett agrees with this, saying that campus events can really bring out the college spirit, but “with the way things stand today I cannot see how colleges can afford to continue doing them.”
The cause has received YUSU backing, with President Tim Ngwena pledging to support the Chairs and committees in articulating what he calls “an urgent need” that calls for “an urgent resolution.”
“Over the last 3 years,” he says, “events on campus have faced rising costs, competition off campus and challenges relating to facilities. This has made it even more difficult for colleges, to not only focus on delivering a great entertainments experience within the collegiate community but, it’s also applied pressure on the bottom line.
“YUSU has increased its support to help alleviate the pressure as highlighted in our current and future work with the colleges, but the situation has reached a point where the institution really do have to support JCRCs in the same way the support the brand and identity that the colleges offer as a unique selling point for the institution”
Despite the concerns raised by both colleges and the Union, the University currently seems unlikely to budge on their position. In a response to Vision’s enquiries into the matter, a spokesperson stated that the University’s four AV technicians do not have the “equipment, resources or expertise” to manage PA and sound deck work at YUSU and JCR events. It was also heavily implied that buying new equipment and hiring additional staff would be too costly and thus out of the question for the time being.
“To provide a service, there would be purchase costs of approximately £35,000 to £40,000 and staff would be needed to transport, set up and maintain the equipment and take it down from around 6pm until 2am, including weekends. It is estimated that a further three technicians would be needed to service these fully. Training, insurance and recurrent costs for repairs, replacement and vehicle transportation costs may also impact.”
However, in light of the impending tuition fees hikes, with York set to follow Oxbridge in charging £9,000 per year, Jenkins sees it as a necessity for an equipment grant to be built into the new finance system, pointing out that other universities already have one in place.
“It is important to note that the rise in one student’s tuition fees would fund all Club Ds for one year. If we did not have to pay for equipment we could reduce our ticket prices so that they are competitive with town, which means that the bars would make more money, so in the end no one loses out.”
Hernando adds that it is up to the University to set the required changes into motion. “We can save our bars, we can save our Colleges. It is in the University’s hands to listen to its College Chairs in our call for an investment in decent sound and lighting systems for all Colleges and the training to be able to utilise them.”
WHAT THE CHAIRS SAY
Nacho Hernando, Goodricke
“The prohibitive costs of hiring lights and sound systems are, without a doubt, at the epicentre of the collegiate earthquake which threatens to destroy our bars, the reputation of JCRCs and our college spirit.”
Lizzie Bartholemew, Alcuin
“We find that it is unacceptable that the students of our college should have to foot the bill for [the events] by us charging higher ticket prices in order to cover the costs.”
Emma Bartlett, James
“It is extremely difficult to break even at an event let alone make profit. I feel that there should be some incentive to college events from a JCRs perspective by reducing the equipment cost dramatically”
Kallum Taylor, Vanbrugh
“We need to change something fast, before we either decide to desert our events and thus, our bars, by going for cheaper options in town, or pull every possible lever to cut costs.”
Cem Turhan, Langwith
“I want to make sure campus college spirit is at it’s highest, because losing alliances and rivalries between colleges is to lose what the University of York is all about, University college pride!”
Davedass Mootanah, Halifax
“We have had to limit our choice of on-campus venues because the costs of hiring equipment in compliance with JSS & TSS are just too high.”
Matt Jenkins, Derwent
“What seems to be constantly ignored by the University is the fact that within a few years on-campus events run by colleges simply will not exist.”
JSS/TSS: THE IMPACT ON SOCIETIES
by Will Thorman
Societies at the University of York have been suffering considerably as a result of YUSU’s less than ideal contract with staging provider JSS/TSS. YUSU’s understanding with JSS/TSS necessitates that all YUSU-affiliated societies hire their staging equipment from these suppliers.
Happily Ever After Soc is just one society that has been struggling to deal with the extortionate rental prices faced as a result of YUSU’s contract. Arjun Kharpal, director of Happily Ever After’s most recent production ‘Return to the Forbidden Planet’ spoke to Vision about the financial difficulties he faced in the planning and organisation of its production. Arjun commented: “[Happily Ever After] had to use JSS and it was a real shame because after giving an initial list to them of what we ideally wanted and receiving a large quote, we were not allowed to take anything away or the quote would work out more expensive since JSS were offering us some sort of ‘package’.”
He continued: “It was a headache which might have been avoided if we were offered another option. The current system creates unnecessary hassle and I’m worried it may deter future societies from putting a performance on, especially those who have very small budgets.”
Budget concerns are particularly pressing where RAG events are concerned, expecially considering their proceeds go to charity. RAG ran into some serious difficulties during its recent week of events: “With Jekyll and Hyde on at the same time, we were unfortunately forced to rent higher bands of staging for the ‘parade’ and ‘bash’ which was not strictly necessary. We had to change the budgets for both events accordingly,” said RAG Chair Jon Hare. Because of YUSU’s exclusive contract with JSS, RAG were faced with much higher costs that were unnecessary and unanticipated. As a result, there were concerns that the ‘RAG Bash’ would struggle to break even, though ultimately both the parade and the bash made a profit.
Some societies have expressed interest as to why the University’s own equipment cannot be used. YUSU have responded that for major events, professional assistance is required to ensure that safety standards are adhered to as well as meeting insurance requirements. For this reason, it was decided that a contract with JSS was the most sensible option at the time. The union is bound to the contract for a further two and a half years.
All three Student Activities candidates in this years’ election raised the issue of YUSU’s JSS/TSS contract in their interviews with Vision.
Considering the dissatisfaction shared by colleges and societies alike with the current contract, YUSU President Tim Ngwena said the contract will be reviewed on its expiration in 2013, as are all contracts, in order to ensure that YUSU offers students the best services.
The prices Tss and Jss charge are at a set rate that’s stayed the same since 2008. The prices they charge are capped at the same rate as Ents Tech (the old student run lighting and sound company) used to charge.
In my opinion the pricing of equipment is not what’s the problem with student events, its the lack of interest from most of the students to want to go to the events. If colleges clubbed together to do better events rather than individual ones, the pricing would work out better and better acts could be hired for the events with a better turn out.
The contract signing was a bit rushed for all involved and none of the parties realised Central Hall shows (which weren’t covered by Ents Tech before) were counted in this contract. Therefore problems arose and are still being worked through.
Jss and Tss are trying their best to help out the students and at least break even at the same time, on certain events such as central hall shows, they do make a loss due to the hours they have to spend in central hall.
You say that the prices are at a set rate. How can you explain that different societies are given different prices for the same equipment and the fact that neither the colleges or YUSU have been given a catalogue of items and prices in all this time?
It is a monopoly, that’s the problem.
We are forced to price our tickets at an uncompetitive price, in comparison to town,if we don’t want to make a loss.
Moreover, those students that do go to the event pre drink due to the already costly ticket price and do not consume in college bars.
nacho, i don’t think that the prices are necessarily uncompetitive. i don’t think that students would mind paying £3-10 for an event if it was guaranteed to be good/interesting. the problem is that a lot of college events are naff, and going to town is always going to be infinitely better.
i don’t even think it’s ALWAYS an issue of technology. yes good music systems enhance an event, but i’ve been to halifax events where yaz (sp?) was DJing off of a laptop and it was perfectly adequate. we’re aware that we’re not paying concert prices so don’t want to receive concert standards in return.
imo a lot of the themes are outdated/cringe worthy, i’m in halifax and i know that a lot of events were based in our very scummy JJs which is of absolutely no interest to 90% of college members! i’d rather have had poker nights in my own (much nicer, and warmer) bedroom to be honest. i think a lot of the events are out of synch with the student body and that’s why they don’t always take off well. colleges pooling together to run better events (in decent places like the courtyard, or v bar, say) would solve your technological issues as well as getting some better/more creative ideas out there.
@DW
I’m not sure that students would pay £3-10 for any on campus event, or a town event, and quite rightly so. Unless it is a large event which is campus wide, then most freshers would pay no more than £2 willingly. Large events which get acts in cost so much to run and take so much organisation that JCRCs would realistically be able to run 1 or 2 a term, which would do nothing for college spirit as well as sociability on campus.
And your comment about town being infinitely better is ridiculous. The clubs in town are shocking. i would much rather spend my night with 300 other members of my college and friends, with good djs playing and competitive drink deals, rather than the crap clubs in town which are embarrassing compared to other cities.
And when we talk about technology, we are not talking about good music systems, we are talking about the bare minimum speaker and light systems, which are then plugged into the most basic music system the JCRCs can rent.
I can’t believe students would rather go to the awful clubs in town rather than pay competitive prices on campus, near to their accommodation in a safe environment with the same calibre of DJs who are playing in town. If costs on equipment could be cut, then prices would be lower than that of clubs in town, the events could afford to get in well-known DJs, and everyone at the event would be people you know, or other like-minded students.
You’re asking for “investment in decent sound and lighting systems for all Colleges and the training to be able to utilise them” – that’s pretty much what Ents Tech was, which presumably wasn’t economically viable which is why it was disbanded. Has anyone actually looked at the facts about what the contract covers, or asked TSS/JSS for their side of the story? Or would that ruin a good article?
Great reply SR! Summed it up perfectly!
“And your comment about town being infinitely better is ridiculous. The clubs in town are shocking. i would much rather spend my night with 300 other members of my college and friends, with good djs playing and competitive drink deals, rather than the crap clubs in town which are embarrassing compared to other cities.”
you’re bringing a third dimension into it; other cities. never did i mention other cities. and i agree, the clubs here are so poor that it says a LOT about college events that i can say clubs are infinitely better. i’d rather go to a bar/pub here anyway, but i do stand by the fact that i’d rather be stood in tokyo (fuck it, ziggy’s even!) than in a cold JJs playing poker with a load of try hard BNOCs.
SR, the College Chairs have actually looked at this in great detail. It wasn’t as if we ran straight to Vision. The editor, Milana, actually a member of the Derwent JCRC herself has experienced and understands the strain that the status quo currently puts our college finances under. So don’t dismiss the motives behind this article as superficial and head-line grabbing.
We’ve highlighted this with YUSU from day 1, and have their absolute backing. Jane Grenville is also working behind the scenes to find a solution to this.
Another major factor behind Ents Tech’s disbanding – possibly bigger than the financial implication of it – was liability. We’re currently looking at ways to go around this.
And let this be clear, I and (I think) the other Chair’s fully support and are pleased with the work that JSS and TSS do. They’re offer a professional and approachable service. We just feel that there should be a more cost-effective way of delivering campus events, otherwise they’ll go; and then our bars will go. Bars which we have a responsibility to keep as a key centre point for our colleges.
Disclaimer: Please note that the views expressed below are my personal views and do not in any part reflect the views of either JSS or TSS
I am a 5th year undergraduate student and for nearly 5 years I have worked at campus and external events providing technical services for EntsTech and external companies. I imagine I have been to more campus events in all colleges than anyone else around, and therefore I feel that my views are well informed and I stand from an unbiased viewpoint with regard to university/YUSU/colleges/external companies.
I have many problems with the article, which I will summarise in a second, however I would like to say that my angst is not towards Vision and what I consider to be shoddy journalism, but more so towards the fact that indeed Vision *is* representing the view of the majority of the student population, a view that itself is misinformed and does not reflect the reality of the situation.
Looking at the opening paragraph of the article, you label the current situation as ‘unsustainable for our college’s campus events and bars’ and the Derwent chair states later that the ‘equipment costs is currently killing off’ college spirit. It is also stated that ‘events on campus have faced rising costs’ over the past 3 years. Unsustainable it may well be, but it has managed to be sustained over the previous decade or more of university existence, so what has changed? Well it certainly isn’t the tech price. Whilst the equipment hire price may have slightly increased in line with inflation and maintenance costs, the contract with JSS and TSS has actually meant that the price has not increased over the past 2 years. How about other running costs for events? Well maybe they have increased a bit, but it’s probably not a substantial increase which would be a factor leading to an event not breaking even.
Let’s now look at the main factor of income for events instead of expenditure: tickets sold. Now from real statistics over the past 5 years that I have been involved in events, there is a significant downward trend in the amount of people attending campus events (mainly focusing here on the standard college events). I can only really speculate on the reasons for this, however I feel that I am in one of the best positions to do so. The events have been the same for the past 5 years, based on pretty much the same themes, generally average-at-best DJs, poor organisation and poor marketing and promotion. Another reason would potentially be increased competition from town, but once again this was there 5-10 years ago, and the clubs in York have really not improved that much. In my opinion, people are being pushed away from college events by the knowledge that it’s not going to be a very good night. Looking specifically at Derwent, I can say that despite the same events year on year, the Club D events have built up a decent reputation for themselves and therefore it is the busiest college event by far. However, even Derwent can rarely sell out a standard event like they used to. I have more to say about all comments just made, however I won’t go into everything now as this is already turning out to be War and Peace II.
Ignoring all the potential other issues with campus events, let’s focus on the equipment. What this article, and the student body, fails to understand is that equipment hire is not the problem for campus events, in fact it is the solution. It is the solution to a university-wide problem of no student venue, and no installed sound/lighting system in any venue (short of the very recently opened, but slightly too small Courtyard). Colleges want to put on events, and they want to do it in their own colleges. Unfortunately, the university has never installed equipment in these venues for a number of reasons, mainly being that it costs a lot of money initially and that they are multi-purpose venues and college events do not take priority. A long time ago, it was decided that the solution to this problem would be to set up an organisation which would purchase a selection of equipment and then move it around campus to provide technical services to events. This organisation was called EntsTech. This required only one set of equipment and meant that one set of people could be professionally trained to handle the health and safety nightmare that is sound, lighting and electrical distribution. Whilst this set of people did move on every 3-4 years, continuously new people were trained to the same standards and continued to provide a worthwhile service.
Without describing the full history of EntsTech, I will say that the assets were sold off in summer 2009 to JSS, a local sound company, and TSS a local lighting company. Now people such as Kallum (who I don’t believe was even at the university when this event occurred) can speculate about the reasons that EntsTech was disbanded, but the truth is that it simply wasn’t financially viable. The number of campus events was decreasing and the equipment was getting older, both requiring increasing equipment hire costs to cover maintenance as EntsTech were not allowed to work on events outside of YUSU’s jurisdiction. Now, as the last EntsTech manager (an actual, paid job; not an elected society role), I can say that liability played no part in the decision to sell off EntsTech by YUSU. However, I can likewise not deny that it does make life easier for YUSU that they are not now liable for the technical provisions at events. There were few, if any, health and safety incidents that occurred due to EntsTech equipment or its staff.
There are so many factors here that I won’t even begin to comment on how I think things can be changed, so I will focus mainly on the problems with the article in question. The article refers to ‘ideas the JCRCs want to pull off’. Now whilst I’m sure the JCRCs have some good ideas, how often do you go to Ziggys because they have a school disco theme or Tokyo because they have a bucking bronco that night? The truth is that you would go to these places without regard for the theme because the clubs have created a reputation based around a good night, with music that you want (or can at least put up with), and people around you who make for a good atmosphere. That cannot be said for campus events: they do not have a good reputation generally, and try to use gimmicks to pull people in. The Alcuin Chair states that the cost ‘restricts our capacity for putting on professional looking events’, however the only thing professional looking about any of the standard college events is the equipment provided by JSS and TSS.
The article goes on to state that the minimum package deal from JSS and TSS costs ‘around £800’. It would not have been too difficult for you to give a call to the companies in question and ask, or even to just go into YUSU and have a chat with someone. In fact, there are a number of standard packages that are offered, which represent the equipment and costs which EntsTech used prior to summer 2009. I do appreciate that the equipment required differs for different venues, however James College do have the option to choose a smaller lighting package and thereby reduce their hire cost. The article barely recognises that these are 2 companies, let alone try to actually ask their opinion as ‘SR’ pointed out.
I would also like to point out another key problem with the current event system that isn’t mentioned in the article. Put into the context of other ‘professional’ events, you would expect a large amount of income to come from the bars. However, commercial services do not share their profits with the colleges. Whilst they do pay for the bouncers, the colleges’ income still does not reflect the amount purchased at the bar. How an event is meant to be competitive with a club when the university won’t even work with the colleges to protect their own bars is unknown. Whilst I think there is much wrong with campus event organisation, I am the first to admit that the university hardly does it’s fair share to support any sort of event financially, even though it is in the interest of its students and even its own financial interest if these events were successful.
In the final section of the article, the university’s response is noted. However, what isn’t noted by Vision, is the irony that the exact proposition suggested by the university is actually precisely what EntsTech previously encompassed. £40k+ of equipment, trained individuals working 6pm to 2am (make that 4am), vehicles and continuous maintenance. This shows a number of things, including the university’s lack of technical knowledge; lack of foresight; lack of hindsight(!); and lack of willing to improve the current situation.
To conclude I will put forward my views on what could be done to improve campus (not necessarily college-specific) events:
1) Allow a weekly campus club night (perhaps extending over time to 2 of different style), promoted, marketed and run by an external non-student who has expertise in event organisation of this type. This event will take place in a venue with a capacity of 600-1000, which is difficult to find. I would suggest Roger Kirk, if long-term provisions could be made to decorate it in a suitable fashion. Courtyard is a great venue but is too small for this purpose. Derwent is also a good venue, however it too has a limited capacity for a campus-wide event.
2) Whichever venue is selected should have a permanently installed sound system put in place, funded by a loan and alumni funding through YUSU. Obviously the Courtyard already has this.
3) Colleges are allowed to put on small events, such as a weekly bop (Manchester Uni does this very successfully in its halls of residence), however the events must not compete with the main campus club nights.
4) Colleges are allowed to purchase and run their own small sound systems for this purpose, which are maintained by an external company on a regular basis to ensure health and safety standards are up kept. The equipment can be run by anybody, provided they have had training which is provided by a YUSU-recognised external company.
5) The university should work with colleges and YUSU to share bar profits from any events.
What will happen due to these changes? I believe:
1) A large campus-wide event will bring in people from all years to an event which will build up a good reputation over a year or so.
2) YUSU will begin to turn profit on these events which can be fed into colleges, allowing their smaller events to be largely subsidised.
3) The university will make bar profits which improves the situation for all college bars
4) The ridiculous solution of equipment hire for every event is removed, and JSS/TSS provide equipment only for the large events and where their expertise is necessary.
The above has pretty much summarised my position with regard to your article and campus events. As has been mentioned, I have a lot more to say on the matter, so anyone can feel free to contact me on facebook or at rih500 _at_ york.ac.uk if they want to discuss things further. I have enjoyed the debate so far and hope I have added some valid thoughts for discussion. I don’t expect people to agree with me, nor do I expect that my ideas will work without a lot of thought planning, and sheer determination. The one thing I do agree with is that the status quo with regard to campus events cannot continue.
Best regards,
Rob Hyams
A bit of historical perspective: the justification given to EntsTech staff (of which I was one) on the disbanding was that it was a cost consideration, primarily related to the cost of maintaining an ageing equipment stock. Unfortunately this argument didn’t (and doesn’t) hold water in the medium to long-term. The moment the pricing structure with TSS and JSS expires this situation is only likely to get worse – there aren’t many options for competitive tender on this kind of service (providing heavy kit to one-off events) when they are the only two companies in the locality.
In reality EntsTech’s major problem was that we technicians were paid, which made the service quite uncompetitive. For major events (e.g. Fusion) the technical staff often volunteered their time to make it affordable, and Campus Audio Visual services quite often provided their help at reduced ‘mates’ rates. The biggest problem with the current arrangement is that big events can’t go out to competitive tender to other companies – myself and colleagues secured major discounts for Fusion from the likes of Stage Electrics and Ad Lib Lighting before this arrangement.
You only have to look at Bath’s highly successful student run technical service (BTS) works to see that there’s nothing fundamentally wrong with an in-house capability. Before killing EntsTech we should’ve looked at removing the real cost base – paying staff – rather than kit maintenance. BTS are volunteer-run, and if it made the difference to life-or-death for Ents Tech, I for one would gladly have worked for free.
Chris (Fusion Head of Lighting 2007, 2009; DramaSoc Technical Manager 2006; and former EntsTech)
The biggest problem is that the contract forces JSS/TSS to supply for too large a range of events. It should only have covered the typical events / club nights. YUSU should have kept a small system suitable for accoustic / comedy / small jcr events (ie speakers on sticks and t-bar lights, nothing fancy, just effective) and left the odd stuff out of the contract – central hall events are the obvious example here. I’m sure fusion will make good use of JSS/TSS equipment but the rest of the shows generally just need a few bits and pieces to supplement the uni equipment. As I understand it, JSS and/or TSS won’t dry hire so there is the cost of someone to babysit stuff unnecassarily.
As I understand it, its not that they won’t dry hire, the YUSU insurance wont allow them to.
As a first year at York I would comment that the college events that I have been to have been some of the best nights I have had at uni. Yes they are not the most sophisticated events but I would rather spend the night with all my friends in the college in one place without worrying about having to get to and from town and the lengthly queues and entry prices, for what are at best average clubs.
It is through the college events that I have really experienced the college spirit as it is rare for the majority of members of one college to be in the same club at the same time. Therefore if we had to lose these college events it would seriously hinder sociability within colleges and damage the college rivalries that really create college spirit. Without this college spirit we may as well just have accommodation blocks for first years and scrap the collegiate system all together, which for me, and I’m sure for many others, was one of the most appealing aspects of the uni.
The main objection to college events is to paying more than what you would have to go to the clubs in town to go to somewhere within your college and therefore not necessarily a ‘night out’. Therefore if the equipment situation could be sorted then the college events would be much cheaper and better attended and more money could go into creating a higher standard of event.
Essentially the reason why I chose Derwent was due to its sociability.
Our events are vital to creating and maintaining the college spirit that we’re all so proud of. Not only this, because we used to make such a substantial profit on our events (the famous/infamous Club-D’s) our JCRC could virtually run self-sufficiently, providing a real and valued service to the college. Namely, that of organising bar quizzes/ city trips and a whole range of other activities designed to keep this feeling of community going strong.
Now we see the University putting keycards on our doors, without even consulting us – the student body – about the knock-on effects they might have. Now we are seeing the University (whoever it may be) increasing the costs to our events without even the slightest regard to how they will impact college life. Now we are seeing an almost blatant disregard to the collegiate system as it stands, and something that has been so carefully built up and maintained over the years – our college spirit – is threatened with extinction due to heavy handed bureaucracy.
The college is spending a quarter of a billion pounds a year (or something near that) on development and improvement. To me its a no brainer. There’s obviously money about.
Give us the support we need to become financially self-sufficient, otherwise this University will become a collection of new buildings with no soul and no identity. If we want to brand our University as one with a vibrant and active collegiate system, its about time the University actually gave us the support we need to run it.
“Now we are seeing the University (whoever it may be) increasing the costs to our events”
Factually incorrect. The only increase we’re seeing is from the VAT increase, as JSS/TSS prices have remained constant, as is dictated by their contract. The problem that we’re seeing is in fact a significant decline in student participation in campus events, a problem we didn’t face last year with basically the same event costs. I think this is a serious issue and it needs to be rectified as the collegiate system represents a key attraction to studying at York, but where the liability lies is a contentious issue. If the University subsidise it they put themselves in a financially dangerous situation, and the colleges themselves feel less pressure to put on a great event.. whereas if they don’t help out at all the whole collegiate system is put in real jeopardy.
I just think that £50,000 (as a maximum of how much colleges and YUSU must pay JSS/TSS for college events annually) is a drop in the ocean compared with the ridiculous sums of money being spunked all over Heslington East at the moment. And even though it’s such a small amount, it is absolutely fundamental to the entire University’s reputation, and I wouldn’t say that’s in any way an exaggeration.
The University must sort this out.