Category: Statement (Page 1 of 3)

This is the result of failed government policy, and Minister Simon Harris.

• 11,189 students in rent or fee debt to their institutions (2022, S4C FOI Database)
• 88% of students worry about finances (source: costofcollege.usi.ie)
• Welfare services underfunded with months-long waiting times (source: University Times, S4C survey, University Observer, UCDSU, etc.).
• Maximum PhD stipend of €18,500 which is below both living and minimum wage, but can go as low as €6,500 a year (Source: PCAU).
• PhDs are not recognized as workers, PhD reserachers have to do unpaid teaching contribution and do not receive public benefits like parental leave (Source: PCAU, PWGA, etc.).
• Non-Eu PhD researchers’ time in Ireland do not count towards their immigration visas and face € 1,000+ extra costs upon arrival like health insurance (Source: PCAU).
• All Non-EU students can expect to pay €30,000 to €50,000 for a year due to tuition fees, rental market and cost of living (Source: PCAU).
• 50% or so of staff casualized at Irish third-level institutions (Source: Irish Precarity Network).
• 80% of all researchers are on precarious contracts (Source: Irish Precarity Network).
• More than 13,000 people in job insecurity across academia, both academic workers and professional workers (Source: Irish Precarity Network).
• Casualized staff earn as little as €10,000 a year and are not sure whether they will have a job after each summer (Source: Irish Precarity Network)..
• Men spend 5.7 and women spend 7.1 years on average in precarity.
• Student:staff ratio is 1:23, highest in the EU (Source: Irish Precarity Network).
• Between 2016-2019 a total of 8,229 student accommodation beds were built. 83% of these are privately-owned. More than 90% of these are only available for € 10, 000+ a year (Source: S4C’s research).
• No strong protections or rights for students in these places. Students have as much rights as a hotel resident (Source: S4C’s research)..
• 92 out of 300 deferrals at University of Galway was self-reported due to the housing crisis (Source: rte.ie).
• 55% of students say they miss lectures to work to pay for costs (Source: ILCU survey 2019) and 60% of families get into debt (Source: USI 2016).
• 1/3 of students considered dropping out, with finances playing a key role. Approximately 15% of students have seriously considered withdrawing from their course due to financial or employment reasons. This is startling that over 20,000 people who have gone onto third level are struggling. (Source: independent.ie)

The Student Partnership Agreement (SPA), an agreement between the TCDSU and College which seeks to put students and staff in a more collaborative relationship.

In reality, the SPA only benefits senior management. It has not been an effective way for College to take the TCDSU seriously, and it is merely ‘words on a paper’.

It has not resulted in an improved relationship between students and the College, with our institution constantly ignoring students’ needs, starting from the 450 € resit fee in 2018, continued attempts to increase rents in accommodation and fees, to a lack of investment in welfare services. We outline the decisions on the following slides which prove that this is a phony agreement.

• 10% fee hike of 2000€ to 5000€ over 4 years for non-EU and postgraduates enacted from 2023.
• 258 students in fee and rent arrears to College in 2021
• Lack of hybrid learning in a cost of living crisis when so many are working part-time or commuting.
• Accommodation run at extortionate rents for profits of € 10 million a year
• 2.6 million € invested in the war-industry (2021).
• 1-2 months waiting at Counselling and Health services.
• 40 million € spent on property acquistion (2020).
• 41% of staff casualized, over 2,500 on insecure contracts.
• As low as 6,5k € / yr stipends for PhDs in some Schools

Students and staff are under the most severe attack from neoliberal forces, which must be met with the utmost fightback. The coalition of senior management with the government, both members of the ruling class, must be opposed.

The political consciousness of the student movement in the U.K. has come to realise that cooperation with senior management is a dead end. Instead, they agitate against them, in an effort to put pressure on the powers that be. This is an example we should follow.

Please see the petition and sign it if you are a Trinity student. If it reaches 250, a referendum will be triggered on it by the TCDSU. Then, we will be able to put pressure on College by boycotting the SPA.

Academic workers are people like School-staff, managers and administrators. They are over-stressed, under-paid and underappreciated in Trinity. When it comes to the issues that we face, it is senior management, those on cushy salaries of € 200,000+ like the Provost (€ ~800 a day), who are responsible, alongside the government. Senior management and the government belong to the same class – the ruling class.

Senior management are responsible for:

• 10% fee hike of 2000€ to 5000€ over 4 years for non-EU and postgraduates enacted from 2023.
• 258 students in fee and rent arrears to College in 2021
• Lack of hybrid learning
• Accommodation run at extortinate rents for profits of € 10 million a year
• 2.6 million € invested in the war-industry (2021).
• 1-2 months waiting at Counselling and Health services.
• 40 million € spent on property acquistion (2020).
• 41% of staff casualized, over 2,500 on insecure contracts.
• As low as 6,5k € / yr stipends for PhDs in some Schools
• They are also complicit in the underfunding of academia. It is the passivity of university leaders that has led to the government growing confident in not funding the sector. It is a dereliction of duty that Provosts and Presidents are not advocating for the sector. The argument that we must toe the line in order to receive funding has failed and is cowardly.

The political consciousness of the student movement in the U.K. has

come to realize that cooperation with senior management is a dead end. Instead, they agitate against them, in an effort to put pressure on the powers that be. This is an example we should follow.

APPEAL TO ALL STUDENTS: SUPPORT PROTESTS, PUT PRESSURE ON THE HIERARCHY AND ORGANISE!

Why the budget is disgraceful

The main student measures in the Budget 2023 are as follows.

• € 1,000 reduction for all students in the Student Contribution Charge (SCC) for this year as a once-off measure.
• Families earning under € 100,000 receive a permanent € 500 reduction, while those earning under € 62,000 will receive a permanent € 1,500 reduction in the SCC through SUSI changes.
• Those on SUSI grants will receive a double payment before Christmas once-off, alongside an incremental increase in January 2023.
• Postgrads on SUSI will receive a once-off € 1,000 and their grants will permanently increase by € 500 from next year.
• PhD researhers on SFI or IRC stipends will receive a once-off payment of € 500.

We believe that this is an election budget, designed to garner appeal from young people and fool us into voting for the neoliberal coalition of Fine Gael, Fianna Fail and the Greens.

This is why most of the measures for students are once-off.

There is no real change in the budget and Simon Harris is breadcrumbing us once again.

We need holistic, permanent and structural policy change.

When it comes to the once-off reduction in the SCC, it is clear that the government are not committing to a publicly-funded third-level sector. If they did, they would have made the cut permanent. This once-off reduction will not alleviate the cost of education that is the highest across the EU, but the money quickly spent on rising cost of living and spiraling rents.

As the USI pointed out in their statement, the changes to SUSI grants will mean, in practice, that “the rate of SUSI will only go up by €8 a week for those on the non-adjacent rates”. For postgraduates, the relief provides pales in comparison to the cost of their degrees and the exploitation they endure. We need radical overhaul, not small tweaks.

Furthermore, the once-off payment of a meagre € 500 for PhD researchers is an insult. It is not enough. Researchers who contribute so much to academia continue to be underappreciated, undervalued and exploited.

Finally, there are no measures to tackle the student accommodation crisis. Students across Ireland are left paying sums of more than € 10,000. Out of 300 students that deferred at the University of Galway, 91 indicated it was due to the rental market. While permanent cuts to the charge for lower income brackets is welcome, without solving the housing issues they are simply not enough.

The Irish Universities Association (IUA) has pointed to the lack of core funding. The government itself identified a lack of € 307 million, but only provided € 40 million for the sector. The continued starvation of academia by the state will lead to intensified commercialization. At this rate, it will take 8 years for the third-level sector to receive the funding it needs.

Commercialization will mean higher rents, higher fees, more casualization, more cuts to vital services like counselling and no recognition of PhD researchers as workers and therefore no proper pay for them.

Historical Context

Third-level institutions acquire 50% of their funding from private sources, the highest in the European Union, due to a lack of public funding. Tuition fees for third-level were abolished in the mid-1990s, however, this has resulted in successive governments being tempted to slowly cut funding. While student numbers increased, so did taxpayer’s investments into academic institutions, but the overall money available per-student has been decreasing. For example, spending per student at third-level decreased from €10,806 in 2007 to €7,089 in 2016, a drop of 34.4%. This is despite the fact that between 2007 and 2016, public spending on education increased by 5.1% .

It is simply not enough, and this has resulted in the corporatization of institutions, where they have to make up for the loss of state funding by operating like for-profit businesses, cutting courses, downsizing services like welfare and putting up fees. Irish academia is at a breaking point.

Students and staff are struggling, while institutions are under immense pressure to perform with little to no funding. Despite the government’s commitment to plug the core funding gap, the € 307 million as announced in the latest plan Funding the Future falls half-short of what the 2016 Cassells Report identified as needed, and its implementation in Budget 2023 is even worse with only € 40 million given.

Furthermore, the plan stated that the Student Contribution Charge (SCC), in addition to non-EU and postgraduate fees, would continue to be a key part of funding. Despite promises, holistic change seems far away. Combined with the housing crisis and cost of living crisis, this risks the elitiziation of academia.

As the cost of education has increased, 11,189 students and their families have fallen in arrears during the Covid-19 pandemic across Ireland. The responses received to a series of FOI requests indicate a 67% increase in fee and university-owned rent arrears from 6,678 in 2018-2019 to 11,189 in 2020-2021. Reports are circulating that students are asking if they can pitch tents on campuses as a result of the accommodation crisis. It shows that students and their families are struggling across Ireland.

The student-staff ratio is 23:1 in Ireland and can be even worse depending on the higher-education institution, while the European average is 15:1. Students find themselves not receiving the proper one-to-one support that they need, and staff are stretched beyond their limits.

Institutions refuse to hire enough staff. Within the Irish third-level education sector, the average rate of casualization is 50%, with 80% of all researchers being on temporary contracts. They can be paid less than €10,000 a year. The average length of time spent in academic precarity in Ireland is 7.1 years for women and 5.7 years for men . The recent increase in college places has put further pressure on institutions, creating a situation where senior management accepts to take places for extra funding but there is no funding for the structures that would be required to deal with the influx, such as accommodation, welfare and sustainable cost of education.

Today Wednesday 06.07.2022 in the Seanad from 3pm to 7pm the HEA Bill 2022 will be discussed. Students4Change alongisde the GSU has lobbied Senators, and they have accepted to put forward 23 amendments to the HEA Bill 2022 on our behalf, ranging from trade unions, student representation, mental health, academic precarity, hybrid learning, powers of the minister, blue skies research, autonomy, climate change and more.

We thank the senators who are on our side.

TCDSU, TCDGSU and S4C will all be in attendance at the public gallery in the Seanad.

AMENDMENTS TO THE HEA BILL 2022 FROM TRINITY COLLEGE DUBLIN GRADUATE STUDENTS’ UNION AND STUDENTS4CHANGE

Currently, on its own website, the aim of the HEA is outlined as follows “to lead the strategic development of the Irish higher education and research system with the objective of creating a coherent system of diverse institutions with distinct missions, which is responsive to the social, cultural and economic development of Ireland and its people and supports the achievement of national objectives”. In its latest form, the HEA Bill 2022 is a complete antithesis in its opposition to these principles. The aim of the amendments outlined below is to guarantee a retention of democratic diversity and real autonomy within our third-level education sector. 

TRADE UNIONS

In page 20, after line 35, insert under a new “(c)” that,

Not less than 2 of the persons appointed under paragraph (a) shall be a trade union representative, one representing academic and the other professional staff.

Explanation: At least 2 of the 12 members on the HEA Board should be trade union representatives, one representing academic and the other professional staff, to give input into the decision-making of the HEA to employees of HEIs.

In page 67, after line 3, insert under a new subsection “(a)” that,

Not less than 2 of the persons appointed to the 5 internal staff positions shall be a trade union representative, one representing academic and the other professional staff.

In page 80, after line 28, insert under a new subsection “(a)” that,

Not less than 2 of the persons elected to the 5 internal staff positions shall be a trade union representative, one representing academic and the other professional staff.

In page 96, after line 14, insert under a new subsection “(a)” that,

Not less than 2 of the persons elected to the 5 internal staff positions shall be a trade union representative, one representing academic and the other professional staff.

Explanation: At least 2 trade union representatives shall be one of the 5 internal staff representatives on governing bodies, one representing academic and the other professional staff, for democracy within HEIs. 

STUDENT REPRESENTATION

In page 66, line 35, replace “(e)” with,

four student members appointed by the governing authority.

In page 80, line 25, replace “(e)” with, 

four student members appointed by the governing authority.

In page 96, line 11, replace “(e)” with, 

four student members appointed by the governing authority.

Explanation: Student representatives should be kept at 4 instead of reduced to 3, in the time of the financial aftershock of a pandemic and a mental health crisis.

In page 66, line 35, replace in “(e)” “appointed by the governing authority.” with “elected by the students through the students’ union.”.

In page 80, line 25, replace in “(e)” “appointed by the governing authority.” with “elected by the students through the students’ union.”.

In page 96, line 11, replace in “(e)” “appointed by the governing authority.” with “elected by the students through the students’ union.”.

Explanation: Student representatives should be elected instead of appointed by the governing authority so as to make sure that they have a democratic mandate, while also guaranteeing that they come from the students’ union.  

In page 13, lines 33-34, should be replaced with,

“students’ union” means an independent and self-governing body, elected by the students, that is established for the purpose of promoting the general interests of students of a designated higher education institution, and of representing students, both individually and collectively, in respect of their well-being and academic, disciplinary and other matters arising within, and outside of that institution.

Explanation: Without this definition, there is the danger the Minister or an HEI can recognize any unelected, undemocratic groups which lack the mandate to represent students if it suits them. It also strengthens students’ union autonomy. 

EQUALITY IN EDUCATION

In page 58, after line 27, insert a new point “(d)” that, 

the policy of the institution relating to the implementation of Universal Design of Learning.

Explanation: The equality statement of HEIs should include progress on Universal Design for Learning (UDL), which, for example, covers hybrid learning, accessibility and other considerations. 

In page 58, after line 27, insert a new point “(d)” that, 

the policy of the institution relating to the implementation of adequate mental health supports for students and staff.

Explanation: The equality statement of HEIs should include progress on implementing adequate mental health supports for students and staff. 

In page 58, after line 27, insert a new point “(d)” that, 

the policy of the institution relating to the eradication of academic precarity.

Explanation: The equality statement of HEIs should include progress on eradicating academic precarity.

ACADEMIC FREEDOM 

In page 12, after line 14, insert two new definitions as follows, 

“academic member” means a member of An tÚdarás who, at the time of his appointment as such member, held an academic post;

“academic post” means a post in an institution of higher education (other than a post as chief officer) all or part of the duties of the holder of which is to teach any students of the institution or to carry out research;

In page 20, after line 35, insert a new point “c)” that, 

Not less than four of the persons appointed under paragraph (a) shall be academic members.

Explanation: As per the HEA Bill 1971, at least 36% (7 of 19) of members on the HEA Board should be academic members, so at least 4 of the 12 on the HEA Board should be academic members. This can act as a safeguard against the continued commercialization of HEIs. 

COMPOSITION OF HEA BOARD AND THE APPEALS BOARD

In page 21, after line 23, insert a new point “(11)” that,

All appointments to the Board of An tÚdarás by the Minister should follow a Public Appointments Service process. 

Explanation: Similar to the Judicial Appointments Advisory Board and other institutions, the HEA Board membership process should go through the Public Appointments Service. This is a complicated amendment. Senator David Norris spoke about it in the Seanad Eireann on the 28th of June 2022 and we fully support such an alternative system for appointing the members of the HEA Board. 

In page 64, after line 33, insert a new point “(10)” that,

All appointments to the appeals board by the Minister should follow a Public Appointments Service process. 

Explanation: The composition of the appeals board should also follow the Public Appointments Service process. 

LAND USE

Delete p.95 s.107, p.95 s.108, p.108 s.118 and p.17 s.9(s).

Explanation: Guarantee more freedom to universities to acquire or dispose of land at their own discretion. This will only be effective if s.38(2)(h), which allows the CEO of the HEA with the HEA Board’s approval to set any arbitrary funding conditions, is removed as well.

CHECKS AND BALANCES FOR MINISTERIAL POWER OVER HEA 

In page 18, replace line 21, with,

“The Minister may give a direction in writing to An tÚdarás, following consultation with the Board of An tÚdarás, for any purpose relating to this Act and concerning—”.

In page 18, replace line 31, with,

“The Minister may issue guidelines in writing to An tÚdarás for the purposes of this Act, following consultation with the Board of An tÚdarás”.

Explanation: For transparency reasons and to act as a check and balance over the power of the Minister, all directions and guidelines must first be discussed with the HEA Board. 

TRANSPARENCY

In page 20, after line 19, insert a new “(8)” that, 

Meeting minutes, agendas and documents of the Board of An tÚdarás, safe for confidential information, shall be made public.

Explanation: All HEA Board minutes should be published for transparency reasons as a requirement within the legislation, because currently, they have not been published since December 2021.

In page 18, after line 29, insert a new “(5)” that, 

All directions issued under paragraph (1) shall be made public.

In page 19, replace lines 6-7, with a new “(4)” that, 

All  guidelines issued under paragraph (1) shall be made public.

Explanation: All directions and guidelines issued under s.11 and s.12 should be publicly available for transparency reasons. 

PUBLIC EDUCATION AND BLUE SKIES RESEARCH

On page 17, delete lines 16-17.

Explanation: Delete “assess the performance of funded bodies with regard to securing value for money in the expenditure of funding provided to them by An tÚdarás under this Act” s.(9)(1)(m) to prevent a consumerist interpretation of education.

CLIMATE

In page 16, after line 9, insert a new point “(h)” that, 

to advance sustainability in higher education.

Explanation: The government has declared a climate emergency, so Introduce climate policy as an objective of the HEA under s.8.

UNIVERSITY AUTONOMY

Delete page 38, line 20-21.

Explanation: Remove s.38(2)(h) which allows the CEO of the HEA, with the HEA Board’s approval, to set any other funding conditions. It is excessive that the Minister-appointed HEA Board can set any other funding conditions. Therefore, it should be removed.

On page 38, delete lines 15-16. 

On page 125, delete lines 29-39. 

On page 126, delete lines 1-11.

Explanation: Remove s.143 which gives power to the HEA, upon direction from the Minister, to issue “guidelines, codes and policies” to HEIs, so as to protect the autonomy of universities. 

In page 60, line 24, after “may” insert “, with the approval of the Board,”.

On page 62, delete lines 4-6.

Explanation: The principles of good governance demand that the approval of the Board be required before remedial measures (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of subsection (3) of s.67 may be imposed on a designated institution of higher education. Currently, only (a), (b) or (d) of subsection (3) requires Board approval, which this amendment removes and replaces with a general requirement for Board approval for measures in s.66, s.67 and s.68.  

On page 61, delete lines 1-17.

In page 61, after line 1, add a new point “(6)” that,

The bringing of an appeal by a designated institution of higher education against a determination of the Chief Executive Officer under subsection (3) to impose a remedial or other measure on the institution shall operate as a stay on the effect of his or her decision, pending the determination of that appeal.

Explanation: Amend s.65(6) by providing that an appeal against a determination of the HEA CEO shall operate as a stay on the effect of his or her decision, pending the determination of that appeal.

On page 38, delete lines 15-16. 

On page 126, delete lines 9-11.

In page 126, after line 11, insert a new point “(6)” that,

Where a designated institution of higher education departs from guidelines, codes or policies prepared under subsection (1), the designated institution of higher education will have to explain the reasons for this, but does not have to comply – 

(i) which parts of the guidelines, codes or policies it departs from, 

(ii) the extent of any such departures, 

(iii) the reasons for such departure or non-application of the said guidelines, codes or policies.

Explanation: If s.143 is not removed, it should follow the “comply or explain” principle which allows a university to not follow the HEA-issued “guidelines, codes and policies” provided that they give an explanation, and this also should not be a condition of funding under s.36 provided an explanation is given, so as to give the sector flexibility.

In page 37, after line 31, insert the following new subsection that,

Nothing in this section shall be construed as permitting an interference with the autonomous capacity of each designated institution of higher education to determine –

(a)   which courses and programmes it develops and maintains, or

(b)   the number of students that will be accommodated on any course or programme or within each designated institution of higher education.

Explanation: In order to protect small courses from being cut or merged, and the subsequent layoff of academics as happened in the U.K, in s.37, insert that HEIs should have autonomous capacities to decide which courses and programmes to develop, and to decide on their number of students. 

AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED BY THE GOVERNMENT

I am here to engage in good faith. It will take the time that it takes, and we will work our way through it. I would not be so rude, as a Member of the Lower House, to try to tell the Upper House how to do its business.

• Minister Harris guarantees that all amendments will be considered. 

Gisèle Scanlon, President of Trinity College Dublin Graduate Students’ Union. +353 86 412 0444, [email protected]  

László Molnárfi, Chairperson of Students4Change, +32 470 58 31 74, [email protected] 

This morning, Minister Harris confirmed that in the HEA Bill 2022, student representation will be increased from 2 to 3. while not the 2-4 that was ideally proposed, the student voice on governing bodies will be stronger than initially proposed. This is a win.

This is the collective work of the TCDSU, S4C, TCDGSU, the USI and other student groups.

As you can see from our posts, There is more to campaign on, and we hope this opens the way for other similar amendments to be made for staff and trade unions. The fight is far from over and the student movement will not rest until our universities are diversified, democratized, decolonized and demarketized!

Take action!

#StopHEABill22

QSOC Statement here.