Document TB21-01
Newman Students’ Union Board of Trustees Meeting
Minutes from the twentieth meeting, held on the 4th February 2016.
Members Present:
James Westwood (JW) Chair and President
Tony Sharma (TS) University Nominated Trustee
Samuel Murphy (SM) External Trustee
Bryannah Collins (BC) Student Trustee
Members Not Present:
Gareth Hughes (GH) Deputy Chair and External Trustee
Carly Williams (CW) Student Trustee
In Attendance:
Nathan Richards (NR) Vice-President
Ryan Beasley (RB) Development Manager and Minute Taker
20.1 Chairs Welcome
The Chair welcomed the committee and welcomed BC to their first meeting as a Student Trustee. JW also welcomed RB, the new Development Manager to his first Trustee Meeting.
There were no declarations of interests.
20.2 Apologies
GH had sent his apologies to the Chair and had some thoughts regarding the agenda and the papers circulated.
JW updated the Trustees on GH thoughts.
GH would like HR Policies to be addressed as a matter of urgency. GH stated that he had spoken to RB about this via a phone call.
GH also would like RB to focus on the Officer pay as a priority.
GH stated that the Students’ Union pension scheme needed to be resolved and that Liverpool Hope had done work on this if RB needed support.
GH stated that the new Strategic Plan looked good, but would be specific about “Council or representation models”. GH would also like to see objectives spread out. There needed to be a focus for what the focus would be during each year of the four year plan.
JW stated that CW had also sent her apologies for the first part of the meeting and would be arriving late.
JW noted that one of the Executive Officers who sat on the Board of Trustees had reigned in November and there was now a vacancy on the Board. JW asked the Board whether they wanted to recruit a new member considering there was only one meeting left of the academic year.
TS raised a concern that there was an imbalance of Student trustees against External Trustees.
JW agreed to take the matter to Executive to be discussed.
ACTION: JW to ask the Executive Committee on the thoughts of recruiting a replacement Executive Trustee Member.
20.3 Minutes from the Last Meeting
SM asked what had happened with the electronic meeting that was done via email and asked if it was an official meeting?
JW stated that GH took the lead on that meeting and was really for the purpose of employing a new Development Manager. JW wasn’t sure if any minutes were typed up as it wasn’t a scheduled Trustee Meeting but would asked GH.
ACTION: JW to ask GH if there are minutes from the email liaison between the Trustees.
JW asked the committee if the minutes were true and accurate.
The Committee Approved.
20.4. Matters Arising not on the Minutes
TS thanked GH and JW for their part in the recruitment process for the new Development Manager.
SM seconded.
JW stated that University of Birmingham Staff were extremely helpful, although their time was limited. JW also stated that it was good to have someone more permanent in place to manage the Students’ Union.
20.4.1 Review of Action Table
There were no actions to be followed up from the previous meeting.
20.14 Block Grant Bid
JW brought the Block Grant Bid further up the agenda as it was a key topic that needed discussing.
RB presented the paper to the Trustees.
SM noted that the Officer Honorariums must be a priority.
RB stated that that the Students’ Union has an ethical obligation to increase the honorarium above living wage so that it fits in line with the University. RB stated that they also have an ethical obligation to replace the free accommodation with money so that mature students and students with caring responsibilities are encouraged to run for the full-time Officer positions.
TS and SM agreed.
TS asked about the increase of staff wages with the increase on the number of staff and why the Students’ Union has two Officers. TS asked if the Union what the Union would miss by having less sabbatical Officers.
RB stated that the Officers are already too operational, and that they are attending far too many University meetings. RB stated that if there were less sabbaticals, then there would never be any time to talk to students.
TS asked why Student Staff aren’t employed to take minutes for meetings.
RB stated that the Union does not currently have the financial capacity to do so. The level of SAGE that the Union currently has allows them to employ up to a certain number of staff, and would cost a lot more to increase that number if we were to employ student staff. RB also noted that he was looking into placement opportunities and will be working with the University on developing these in the future.
RB concluded by asking the board not to approve the paper as a budget, but to approve that RB and JW present this paper to the Vice-Chancellor as a bid.
JW asked the board to approve.
SM stated that he approved providing that a new member of staff and the Officer Honorarium were highlighted as priorities.
TS agreed and thanked RB for producing a good document.
The board approved the bid.
ACTION: RB and JW to arrange a meeting with the Vice-Chancellor to present the paper.
20.6 President Report
JW presented his Presidents Report.
TS asked how JW would get out of the office more.
JW stated that both the President and Vice-President had become very operational in the absence of a Development Manager and should now have more time out of the Office. JW stated the Sabbaticals should start using their iPads more so they can answer emails while out of the office.
RB stated that during the first four weeks in position, he had encouraged the sabbaticals to get out of the Office by holding an open forum with nearly 100 responses from students. This event was called Your Ideas.
20.7 Vice-President Report
NR presented his Vice-Presidents Report.
NR stated that the previous four weeks have been a good indication of where the Union is heading with RB as Development Manager.
SM asked NR about SU events and stated that the Union must stop doing events that make a loss.
The board agreed.
20.8 Union Chair Report
The Union chair wasn’t present.
ACTION: JW to meet with the Union Chair.
20.9 Development Managers Report
RB gave an update to the Board.
SM thanked RB for his efforts in his first month as Development Manager.
TS left the room.
20.10 Policies Passed at Student Meetings
There were no policies at Student Meetings
20.11 2015-2016 budget
RB presented the budgets to date to the Board.
RB stated that the SU Administrator requires training and development with the SAGE systems and with the budget sheets. RB referred to the Block Grant Bid on the agenda where the training and development was planned.
20.12 Newman on Tour Benchmarking Trip
RB presented the paper to the Board for approval.
RB asked the board for money from the reserves to conduct the benchmarking research.
The Board approved for £655 to be taken from the reserves for the Benchmarking Trip.
20.13 Elections Update
NR asked if the chair would like him to leave the room for this part of the agenda.
JW asked RB if there was anything that would give NR an advantage over other candidates.
RB stated that all the information given to the trustees was already common knowledge amongst all candidates and was on the website and therefore NR could stay in the room.
RB gave an update on SU Elections.
20.15 Students’ Union HR Report
20.15.1 NEST Pension Scheme Approval
RB presented the NEST Pension Scheme Paper to the Board.
RB suggested NEST as the Pension provider as it was set up specifically by the government for auto-enrolment pensions, and the University had already done a considerable amount of work on this.
RB stated that all new members of staff shall be enrolled onto the NEST Scheme.
There was a conversation about the Development Manager’s enrolment date onto the NEST Scheme.
RB asked the board about members of staff who were already enrolled into a pension scheme with the University.
This part of the agenda was discussed in closed session.
The Board agreed to use NEST as the Pension provider.
CW entered the room.
20.15.2 Appraisal Process Approval
RB presented the Appraisal Process to the Board.
RB stated that there was only one significant difference that required an external trustee to acknowledge that an appraisal had taken place.
SM offered to sign off staff appraisals, but asked who would be conducting the Development Manager’s appraisal.
RB suggested to the board that he could do a 360 appraisal instead of the traditional appraisal process as he works with a number of different people on the Board, in the Union and within the University.
The Board suggested that this should be discussed further at the next meeting.
20.16 Graduation Ball
JW gave an update on the option of hosting a Grad Ball.
RB wasn’t confident that the Union could reach the number of students required to break even and as the Development Manager wasn’t comfortable putting his name next to the expenditure.
SM asked if any research had been conducted.
JW stated that they hadn’t researched yet.
ACTION: JW to conduct some research before the Board agree to spend on a Graduation Ball.
20.17 Approval of the Annual Report
RB presented the Annual report to the Board and asked if there were any questions.
JW asked RB to explain the commentary about the Raise and Give Society.
RB explained that a group of students had directly raised money to Childreach International through fundraising pages and not through the Students’ Union accounts, but still wanted to be recognised for the work they did. Therefore, a note had been made of the success of the students despite it not being recorded through the SU as it was not part of Raise and Give.
There was a discussion in closed session about the process of putting together the Annual Report.
The Board approved the Annual Report.
20.18 Any Other Business
JW asked for the Board’s opinion on using Casino’s for facilities and conferences as a local casino had offered free services in exchange for promotion.
A discussion was held about the ethics of promoting gambling to students at Newman University
CW expressed that she didn’t feel that the Union should be promoting gambling under any circumstances.
SM agreed.
The Trustees did not approve the use of Casinos in Union activity.
SM stated that in future these decisions should be made by the Executive and then if needed ratified by the Board of Trustees.
20.19 Date of the Next Meeting
The date of the next meeting was set for the 12th May 2016.