2015-02-22 (Open)

An open meeting was held in the Terrace Room at 6.45pm on Sunday 22nd February 2015.

Attendance (JCR): Jacob Sen (minutes), Furqaan Kaji, Joe Pape, James Troup, Eowyn Elliot, Dom O’Neill, Joel Daramola, Sandy Rushton, Solene Fercocq, Jennie Towler, Emily Bosley, Charlotte Attwood, Jenni Irons, Oli Lane, Anna Edgar

Apologies: Kate Jones, Martin Dunne

James Troup (herein called JTR): Opened up the meeting. First husting as candidate had to leave early.

Veer Goiporia: Did hustings.

JTR: First one is objections to the minutes and matters arising.

JTR: Okay, so onto committee reports. The first thing is what was discussed at the last open meeting at 4th year accommodation guarantee. Unfortunately we were unsuccessful in the governing body meeting and the ‘guarantee’ of 4th year accommmodation. They were very specific in saying that it is only the ‘guarantee’ that is not assured – the governing body do not foresee any issues arising from the lack of this guarantee. It was said by the governing body that guarantee would be a ‘legitimate aspiration’ once Wyng Gardens had been built.

Next is Sky TV

Solene Fercocq: Were looking at the dish, maintenance is progressing in trying to fix the Sky TV.

JTR: Also looking into looking into gender neutral toilets – really thinking about gender neutral toilets around in public spaces in college. There are two toilets near the welfare room which are discrete cubicles in a room so the plan is to try and make those gender neutral.

Eowyn Elliott (herein EE): Issues for fire safety – when rooms with cards are being locked/opened there have to be locked/unlocked a second or third time – this is a fire safety issue, they shouldn’t be doing it and maintenance are happy to replace it as long as a maintenance request is point in.

JTR: Subletting Scheme

SF: Please keep submitting rooms for the subletting scheme – great because you’re getting paid for a room you’re not using. At the moment lots of people are requesting rooms but there is a lack of people with available rooms over the holidays.

JTR: Allergen labelling in hall.

Sandy Rushton (herein SR): Allergen labelling – at the moment anyone can ask the kitchen about any allergens might be in food in hall. Under then ew EU regulations there are 14 allergens that they are required to tell you (students) about when you go for food – the idea was to bring to the kitchens committee to try and have food or maybe putting on the menus online what allergens are in each food.

SF: This was brought to the kitchens committee, but college feel as though this would be time consuming. Also, putting it online means that there may be a change and so the information may be out of date. Also, college say that they try to offer lots of variety and so it wasn’t practical enough to keep labelling everything. Also, especially in the salad bar, there is a risk of cross contamination and so there’s no guarantee that there aren’t allergens in food that might use different serving equipment. The idea was brought up was that people with allergens could email Rachel Mortimer and then Trinity Hall can know what are the most common allergens are – that way the college can label the most common allergens that come up.

SR: Just to clarify, it’s not under EU, it needs to be disclosed to the customer in the verbal or written form – it may just be that somebody needs to know all the allergens. This is done already (verbally) but it’s not well advertised.

Emily Bosley: It might be easier just to put it on the mains.

Anna Edgar: It becomes very awkward to ask about all the foods that might be brought up.

EE: I think if they are going to label it they should be putting it online so they know whether they can avoid hall that day.

SF: In that case, a referendum should be sent out – whether people are happy with the current system and whether or not there should be labelling online.

SR: I had no idea that they could ask a member of staff this and it might be good to have a poster to say that one can go and ask as legally someone has to know.

JTR: 4th year MCR/JCR membership. The college have asked for the MCR and JCR to produce position papers on whether 4th year undergraduates should be members of JCR or MCR. There was quite a lot of controversy in previous times about this issues. There are written copies of the position paper (will be attached) which will be backed by the MCR. The JCR position is that there should be a referendum. One of the things that was thoughts about this is that there is an opt in system as the issue is quite complex. The hope is that the college will issue their own information on what will happen with MCR or JCR membership. [The JCR] believe it’s better to have a vote open to the entire JCR – the worry is that people might not fully understand the issue, so the plan is that we ask people to register to vote. Firstly, what to people think about that particular aspect?

Ellen Judson: People who it doesn’t affect might not

JTR: The other part is that the tutorial office will issue information on all the different effects JCR or MCR membership might have – for instance: fixed kitchen charge, accommodation, superhall and grad halls. One of the final points is that this is only implemented in Easter term as current 4th years are exempt from this change as they have already experienced a lot of turbulence due to changes.

Lizzie Gaunt: One student is able to book onto grad hall and superhall. Is this an issue?

JTR: I think this is very much an anomaly and this isn’t a regular occurrence.

SF: Just to clarify – this is still only for people who go onto their 4th year but are still an undergraduate. This means you would not be able to grad housing with graduates, but you get the same bursaries that are available to undergrads, they also get access to

Charlie: JCR gets funding per member – if you gained members, would college be willing to give the MCR more money?

Matt Samson (MCR President): Discussion about the reasoning behind the £60 charge for these students wanting to join the MCR – to do with balancing out and the perception that those who pay a large amount of money already to be a graduate at the college means that these members should also contribute to the MCR budget if they are accessing MCR benefits.

JTR: We feel it would be important that there is a vote over this £60 charge.

EB: Question about Freshers ents.

MCR Pres: All these students will be welcome to those students coming to MCR fresher events, and this committee is open to community and collaboration. Hopefully this will also be continued in the next MCR committee.

Also ,the allotment for MCR is 18k and the JCR is 20k – a large proportional of that is the grad hall – the subsidised meals are the primary advantage of joining the MCR. Also, a large proportion of the JCR budget goes to the societies, as do the MCR. This will perhaps be what helps people decide between either MCR or JCR.

SF: The details for this need to be ironed out, including the point that there is a £60 charge.

Ellen Judson: One member managed to join JCR even when they’re MCR which was acceptable due to the JCR constitution, but in terms of kitchens they had to be one or the other.

Zephyr: One of the big points is about representation – it’s difficult is 4th years is ANYONE who is in their fourth year – this includes intermitters, but also includes fourth year masters – and there’s a good argument to them accessing the grad union.

EB: If you are at cambridge for more than 3 years you should be represented at the graduate union as well.

JTR: Onto gowns. There are gowns that have been deposited in the JCR office. There was confusion that some of these gowns might have been parts of the JCR. I have done an inventory and there are 16 gowns – 10 of these are graduate gowns and are quite valuable. How do people think about selling the gowns and giving the proceeds to charity (not to the JCR).

50 for

0 against

0 abstain

There were 6 undergraduate gowns and 3 were not from Trinity Hall. There is one that is from Trinity Hall – that is in poor condition, one from another company that is fair, and one from Edes and Ravenscroft. I think it would be appropriate to retain as spares or something.

SF: Or those who have lost a gown can be pulled out of the gown and they can have the gown.

EB: Another thing is that they can have a donation to charity.

SR: We should not make anyone angry about them having to buy a gown again, which is a totally fair argument, so maybe we should draw names out of a hat for those people who might have lost them.

JTR: In which case, we’ll get people to email in and we can have a draw to get the gowns.

EE: To encourage people to put names on their gowns we could link people to name tags so that they can be easily found and returned to their owners should they be lost around college again.

JTR: Now onto MML Balloting. At the last open meeting, Katie Bachelor had some queries and questions about the MML Ballot and it’s functions. MMLs ballot this year as if they are going to their year abroad (3rd year) but actually get their room in 4th year. The concerns were is that people who come back together might not be able to live together. Additionally, the hope is that there is an opportunity to ballot in Wyng Gardens should it be completed. Having spoken to people doing year abroad, option B is preferable – the option is that they can ballot again this year and then move down the ballot if they want to go together. They can relinquish the rooms they have, they can be put into the ballot at a ‘broad equivalent’ in the next year – they will be put in the same place but maybe slightly lower (4 or so spaces). The other option is they ballot from abroad – this could be problematic as contacting others. Also, it should be noted that Wyng Gardens might not be completed in 2016. Any thoughts? Put it to a vote: the idea that inserting into the ballot for the year below should be looked into – maybe consulting the year it affects and clarifying this.

55 for

0 abstain

0 against

JTR: Next issue is questions for the committee. Any questions?

SF: Next point is CUSU motions – there aren’t any.



Open meeting ended at 7.33pm Sun 22nd Feburary 2015

The open meeting was followed by JCR Hustings

These minutes were compiled by JCR LGBT+ officer Jacob Sen

This website stores some user agent data. This data is used to provide more extensive and relevant information on the website. Data collected includes, but is not limited to, whereabouts on the website users view, and from where this has been accessed from. This statement is required in compliance with the European General Data Protection Regulation. For more information contact the webmaster. If you decide to opt-out of any future tracking, a cookie will be set up in your browser to remember this choice for one year. I Agree, Deny