- Run through the actions of the minutes from last meeting
- Confirmed that there was a circulation of the meeting date and time
- Unsure whether confirmation from Holley had been completed
- ACTION – VP to check with DMW whether confirmation of Holley's report has been completed
- Confirmed that research into Sexpression has been done
- All parties should now be aware
- Confirmed changes to the Nightline By-law
- Confirmed changes to the Well-being Committee By-law
- Housing Officer decision has been made
- 6 votes in favour
- Friday Night Kitchen is on the agenda under AOB
- Focus Areas discussion is on this agenda
- VP confirmed that she had a conversation with Katie, will discuss in further detail later in the meeting
- VP confirmed that she had a conversation with Union Council Chair. Union Council Chair needed more information so action has been agreed that David (D) will contact Council Chair to move this forward
- ACTION – D to contact Union Council Chair to discuss reasons behind why Student Life Zone (SLZ) want to have the Penalty Guidance as a sole item for discussion
- Housing Officer update
- Confirmed that the position has gone through SLZ and has now been passed onto Democracy Zone who should have made a decision on it by now.
- The Housing Officer (HO) will be under review in line with the Student Leader (SL) review with the hope that it becomes a SL. The review is however hoping to streamline the amount of SL’s, and no decisions have been made yet.
Kilby (K)
- Asked what SL’s were
VP
- Does the work below the Vp’s and are expected to work 10 hours a week.
- *went online to look at the SUSU websites breakdown of the roles in the democratic process*
- Confirmed that we elected the HO to be on the WBC
VP
- Went on to discuss Disciplinary Guidance (DG) in more detail
- VP had discussed with the Union Council Chair but he was unsure what she meant. So there was a need for another member of the committee who was at the last meeting to discuss with the Chair in more detail
- Refer to action noted in minutes run through
- Informed the committee that at the last SLZC there was a discussion which prompted the need for there to be a wider discussion and broader change at Union Council
D
- There needs to be a distinct set of ideas going forward so that the conversation is structured and doesn’t become a free-for-all
- Talked to some sports teams, namely American Football, Rugby, and Football, regarding their social shirts and how this links in with the DG.
VP
- Confirmed that Democracy are looking into the shirts
D
- There is a line between humour and offence and that needs clearer definition and monitoring
VP
- Queried the levels of action and punishment in regard to DG and sports teams
K
- Do they not already have these in place?
VP
- They do but it needs a review
A
- We were meant to review the 5 tiered systems and with logic we thought it should go down to 3 levels. There was a notice in regard to how DMW noticed how alcohol is treated with less severe punishment.
Pollins (P)
- In reference to alcohol and punishment, has a strong opinion against the difference
D
- There should be a consideration that alcohol be deemed as a risk assessment and that committees should be aware of alcohol implications
P
- Confirmed that they don’t need to do a risk assessment for a social
D
- Yes but in reference to prevention of risks on a social
P
- I know that I need to be responsible as I am in a position of responsibility
VP
- Queried whether there needs to be greater training?
- ACTION – Charlie to get content of Student Group President training from Nick (manager of dept.) to present at next SLZC meeting
D
- Noted that there has been a change with the amount of initiations
VP
- Noted that there are limited amounts of ways to monitor initiations
D
- Presidents have training and are aware of the wider implications. The Social Sec (SS) is not always official so isn’t accountable.
VP
- SS training as a potential idea?
D
- Check the cost/benefit code of conduct (COC) to be signed. Should have a COC that is defined by SUSU. Link that to PEEL code. Not so strict. Need to sign by whole committee. Emphasis on key roles for discipline, President, Vice President, and Social Sec. There could be a penalty for the whole society.
VP
- Each disciplinary committee can make decision on punishment across group.
- ACTION – VP and D to have chat about COC
CG
- Presented idea that the SS could become professionalised as a core member of the committee. This would make the role more accountable.
D
- This would be ok for some groups but not for the smaller groups. As this is left with the President they should delegate the responsibilities
VP
- Noted that the majority of active groups have SS’s
- We could look at how many groups have SS’s
P
- We could actually document all the committee positions
VP
- We could have that on the Hub and people who aren’t elected don’t sign
P
- We need to look at the ways in which we can get people to sign and take responsibility
D
- Even if they have a SS then the President has responsibility
- Any punishment can be long lasting
P
- This does force the group to apologise. We need to start thinking and get them thinking that they are organisations and take a holistic responsibility
D
- All should care not just perceived groups like Feminist Society. The conversation needs to come from the top. I would rather that SUSU has a feminist agenda rather than just a particular group.
DECISION – minutes have been approved by the group