The Union Council currently has a total of 44 members. Several have attended less than half of all their meetings, while some have attended only a third or less.
Athletic Union Officer Katie Lightowler at 25%, Union Councilors Kelechi Nze and Naresh Krishna Gopikrishnan at 17% and 0% respectively, are some of the most egregious examples.
I would like to emphasise that regular non-attendance at meetings can have very detrimental affects on SUSU by not only making Council and Zones less representaive than intended but also by impeding the work of SUSU by increasing the possiblity of not meeting quorum.
What disciplinary actions have been taken against members under Rule 10, Section 5.2 of which states: "If an Officer fails to give apologies for non-attendance at three meetings or fails to attend six meetings, their performacne will be subject to review by the relevant Sabbatical"?
This has been the case for at least 17 volunteer officers.
Furthermore, has action been taken to recall members who have missed either all, or almost all, UC/Zone meetings? If not, why not?
This question was answered at council, and I will do my best to sum up that answer here:
As student volunteers in their roles, we aim not to create a culture of recalling and punishing student leaders when often a more tactful approach is required – University is a stressful time! We also recognise that often, by the time a pattern of behaviour is established, it is so close to the next election or the end of the year that the issue slips by, and this has been addressed in the democracy review.
It was also noted in the meeting that some of the people who have missed zone meetings in fact attend many, many more meetings besides the zonal ones, and that the reported numbers are not necessarily always reflective of their commitment to their role.
Thursday 9th Jun 2016 11:31am
Question for: Union President