Update 2021-07-06-hostel-affairs.md

_posts/2021-07-06-hostel-affairs.md

@@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ Watch Out! presents a manifesto review of the General Secretary Hostel Affairs (
 
 **WO:** You mentioned a meet scheduled with the Director and the SOPs put forth by the SAC. Firstly, is the admin properly monitoring all the things, how frequently do they seek updates from the SAC, and what SOPs have been put forth by the council as of now?
 
-**Manu:** Right now, ensuring a safe campus return is the first priority of the entire SAC. We've already submitted our proposed guidelines to the admin, which focuses on the Ph.D. students for the time being, and will be followed by people from other programmes. We would also like to add that our initial SOP only focused on fully vaccinated students instead of splitting the campus return process into phases based on their academic degrees. However, most of the deans intervened and revisited the proposed SOP stating that a majority of the violation of Covid guidelines on campus was done by the UG students last time, as observed by their' investigation,' blaming them for the surge in cases. Of course, we realize this isn't true, considering the PhDs and profs were the early contributors to the spread of the virus, and the intake of UG students coincided with the second wave and misproceedings in the state. The SAC has already brought this fact to the notice of our admin, and we're still awaiting a reply. In no way does this suggest that only PhDs will be favored in the call-back process. The admin is still unclear about its plan for campus return, and we must offer them sufficient time considering the recent proceedings in the state. But rest assured, we'll try our best to convince the admin and ensure minimal loopholes exist in the final action plan. We only expect the students to adhere to slightly stringent norms and assist us in identifying and penalizing those who violate them in the future. After a few meetings with the admin, discussions would resume on the following SOP: Any student who has been completely vaccinated (both doses) will be able to apply for campus return, following a 21 days gap after the 2nd dose. We'll start calling them in batches of, say, 50 students initially, after checking their RTPCR report. Since we'd only call the students who've taken both doses initially, we suggested it won't be necessary to send them for voluntary quarantine in Saharanpur or other campuses. If things proceed properly, we'll increase the intake, considering the hostel vacancy. Also, keeping in mind the misproceedings that occurred last time, we would implement strict guidelines, like complete lockdown of 10 days and restricting the movement inside campus starting from the hostels itself. Such approaches would be carefully planned and might seem painstaking, but we assure you they won't be pedantic. Our admin is continuously monitoring things and seeking constant updates from the medical and state authorities and is yet to comment on our submitted proposal. A special 3rd-wave committee has been established that submits their observations of the 3rd wave and the recent Delta strain of the virus on a timely basis to the admin.
+**Shivam:** Right now, ensuring a safe campus return is the first priority of the entire SAC. We've already submitted our proposed guidelines to the admin, which focuses on the Ph.D. students **for the time being**, and will be followed by people from other programmes. We would also like to add that our initial SOP only focused on fully vaccinated students instead of splitting the campus return process into phases based on their academic degrees. However, most of the deans intervened and revisited the proposed SOP stating that a majority of the violation of Covid guidelines on campus was done by the UG students last time, as observed by their' investigation,' blaming them for the surge in cases. Of course, we realize this isn't true, considering the PhDs and profs were the early contributors to the spread of the virus, and the intake of UG students coincided with the second wave and misproceedings in the state. The SAC has already brought this fact to the notice of our admin, and we're still awaiting a reply. In no way does this suggest that only PhDs will be favored in the call-back process. The admin is still unclear about its plan for campus return, and we must offer them sufficient time considering the recent proceedings in the state. But rest assured, we'll try our best to convince the admin and ensure minimal loopholes exist in the final action plan. We only expect the students to adhere to slightly stringent norms and assist us in identifying and penalizing those who violate them in the future. After a few meetings with the admin, discussions would resume on the following SOP: Any student who has been completely vaccinated (both doses) will be able to apply for campus return, following a 21 days gap after the 2nd dose. We'll start calling them in batches of, say, 50 students initially, after checking their RTPCR report. Since we'd only call the students who've taken both doses initially, we suggested it won't be necessary to send them for voluntary quarantine in Saharanpur or other campuses. If things proceed properly, we'll increase the intake, considering the hostel vacancy. Also, keeping in mind the misproceedings that occurred last time, we would implement strict guidelines, like complete lockdown of 10 days and restricting the movement inside campus starting from the hostels itself. Such approaches would be carefully planned and might seem painstaking, but we assure you they won't be pedantic. Our admin is continuously monitoring things and seeking constant updates from the medical and state authorities and is yet to comment on our submitted proposal. A special 3rd-wave committee has been established that submits their observations of the 3rd wave and the recent Delta strain of the virus on a timely basis to the admin.
 
 
 **WO:** One crucial thing to consider is the efficacy and the duration of the vaccine doses. Several students still haven't taken the 1st dose yet, and there are some vaccines like the Covishield, for example, which has a more considerable 2nd dose duration than its counterpart. The submitted proposal assumes students have taken both doses before they proceed with the slot booking. Considering this will further delay the process, don't you think the Institute should aid the students by organizing vaccine drives?
@@ -36,34 +36,34 @@ Watch Out! presents a manifesto review of the General Secretary Hostel Affairs (
 
 Several students complained about the admin not paying heed to the student priorities in the slot-booking process. A few students approached us, claiming that their first two preferences were ignored, which resulted in a closer than expected date to reach the campus (Saharanpur and Noida). Then there were multiple discrepancies in the Wellness Centre System. We observed numerous reports of students making their way past the Wellness Center process, depriving the needy ones of this service. While it's understandable that all the student preferences cannot be considered while scheduling the slots, will the admin and the SAC ensure that such instances would not frequently occur this time and that there will be a quick grievance redressal?
 
-**Manu:** I personally supervised the entire slot-booking process, ensuring all preferences are considered before scheduling the final slots. In most cases, we offered a sufficient time of around ten days to reach the Quarantine Centre. I even handled those cases where people had personal emergencies or couldn't meet this deadline on an individual basis. However, again, we received multiple baseless requests from some students, like shifting the slots since their friends are present in some other quarantine center or some relaxation in campus movement restrictions. Now such cases definitely can't be paid heed to. Students must realize the significance of this voluntary return to Quarantine Centres in Saharanpur and Noida campuses and act wisely. Again, multiple issues involving funds were tackled by the SAC, like arranging for the food at a low cost and a stay free of charge. Testing was free in the Saharanpur Campus. We had to compensate for all this deficit by putting in our SAC funds so that the student return would be cost-efficient, thereby putting a financial burden on the Institute.
+**Shivam:** I personally supervised the entire slot-booking process, ensuring all preferences are considered before scheduling the final slots. In most cases, we offered a sufficient time of around ten days to reach the Quarantine Centre. I even handled those cases where people had personal emergencies or couldn't meet this deadline on an individual basis. However, again, we received multiple baseless requests from some students, like shifting the slots since their friends are present in some other quarantine center or some relaxation in campus movement restrictions. Now such cases definitely can't be paid heed to. Students must realize the significance of this voluntary return to Quarantine Centres in Saharanpur and Noida campuses and act wisely. Again, multiple issues involving funds were tackled by the SAC, like arranging for the food at a low cost and a stay free of charge. Testing was free in the Saharanpur Campus. We had to compensate for all this deficit by putting in our SAC funds so that the student return would be cost-efficient, thereby putting a financial burden on the Institute.
 
 We would refrain from commenting anything on the discrepancies with the Wellness Centre because SAC doesn't have any official representative in Wellness. We had raised this issue of students bypassing the process to the admin since we identified many such cases ourselves. The SAC even suggested that a proper survey be conducted to collect the data of students who genuinely face issues and that an appropriate committee should be set up to investigate the student background, similar to those adopted in other IITs. We were even ready to lay down 4-5 solid plans for the same and assist the admin with all the planning and administration stuff. However, the admin insisted that they're handling this 'properly' and would punish the perpetrators later on. Besides, it's totally irrelevant to comment on this system since we are not aware of the entire process, and in scenarios where even a single serious case is missed, we would have to face the repercussions later on. But one thing was pretty straightforward: the admin allowed ten non-deserving students to enter the campus at the leverage of 1,2 genuine ones.
 
 
 **WO:** The CMO approved government hospitals in the state to treat the Covid +ve patients who were totally unequipped last time. Several issues arose [https://www.facebook.com/watchoutiitr/posts/4058953160795263](https://www.facebook.com/watchoutiitr/posts/4058953160795263){: style="text-decoration:underline; color:blue"}, which were ignored by the medical authorities, initially causing distress to several students. Has the CMO refined this list of approved treatment centers, and more importantly, are proper SOPs being proposed this time to counter this loophole?
 
-**Manu:** Firstly, the list of Government Hospitals was compiled by the District CMO and not our Institute CMO. Our Institute authorities don't have much say in these things. When a student turns up Covid+ve, our CMO only has the authority to assign the treatment center depending on the severity of the case. The power to declare any hostel/department as a containment zone and isolate the same lies in the hands of the District Magistrate(DM) Roorkee. The same goes for uplifting the imposed lockdown. At the recommendation of the DM Roorkee, our authorities had to shut down the campus temporarily. The Centres identified last time lacked even the basic facilities. There were issues related to proper sanitization and food distribution. One thing to note here is that such problems are still prevalent and need to be considered while taking a stance on the campus opening. There's a lot that can be and needs to be done, like contributing to proper infrastructure management and ensuring good facilities are provided in such centers for our students by providing adequate funding. In my opinion, this is where our admin clearly lacks, as it believes it's the sole responsibility of the state to manage all these things rather than assisting them with the same.  
+**Shivam:** Firstly, the list of Government Hospitals was compiled by the District CMO and not our Institute CMO. Our Institute authorities don't have much say in these things. When a student turns up Covid+ve, our CMO only has the authority to assign the treatment center depending on the severity of the case. The power to declare any hostel/department as a containment zone and isolate the same lies in the hands of the District Magistrate(DM) Roorkee. The same goes for uplifting the imposed lockdown. At the recommendation of the DM Roorkee, our authorities had to shut down the campus temporarily. The Centres identified last time lacked even the basic facilities. There were issues related to proper sanitization and food distribution. One thing to note here is that such problems are still prevalent and need to be considered while taking a stance on the campus opening. There's a lot that can be and needs to be done, like contributing to proper infrastructure management and ensuring good facilities are provided in such centers for our students by providing adequate funding. In my opinion, this is where our admin clearly lacks, as it believes it's the sole responsibility of the state to manage all these things rather than assisting them with the same.  
 
 
 **WO:** While it was evident that IITR hospital is devoid of Covid treatment facilities, absolutely zero efforts were made to upgrade the basic ones. The previous guidelines stated that any student who reported Covid+ve would be directly taken to the CMO-approved hospitals. Lack of infrastructure and proper SOPs resulted in several hostels being converted to Quarantine centers. Frequent changes in the SOPs each day gave rise to a plethora of problems, including the non-availability of doctors to treat patients inside the Quarantine centers, improper food supply, frequent testing characterized by delayed reports citing incompetency by the testing lab authorities. Lack of proper attending resulted in the most tragic incident where an M.Tech student lost his life. So, what measures will be taken this time to curb such issues regarding the lack of proper infrastructure and timely attending of all the students?
 
-**Manu:** Times then were chaotic, yes, but that was because we were still in the process of making the SOPs and refining the existing ones. Things took an unexpected turn once the Covid cases started rising. When we began sending the Covid +ve people for treatment in the government hospitals, we found out there were terrible facilities therein. Also, when we started converting the hostels into Quarantine centers, things were awful. We arranged all these things at the student level; the admin wasn't even aware that such problems existed. I ensured that oximeters and thermometers were made available in Rajiv Bhawan and proposed the authorities do the same in all the Quarantine Hostels to check on the students so that any mishap doesn't occur. When we raised these issues, the admin made arrangements for doctors two days later, but no efforts were made to make the instruments available for treatment; this was the reason for the lack of treatment in quarantine hostels. The issue related to testing and delay in their reports was negligence from the lab's end. Most of the accredited labs were assigned to handle the rising cases due to the Kumbh. Our admin just assigns the remaining labs to a particular zone, leaving the entire menial work of monitoring their operation to the GenSecs. With the assistance of Deputy PG, I had to personally accompany each lab member to confirm if proper testing was done. In cases of negligence, we discontinued the lab's working and made sure competent ones like Tata provided their services to our students via my personal contacts. We had several meetings with the CMO and relevant authorities where we questioned them for the disregard from their end. However, we've still not received any satisfactory answer for the delay in responding from their side. They directly shrug off the responsibility, putting all the blame on the state. We're trying our level best to raise all these issues to the admin and are hopeful that proper arrangements are made this time to tackle these issues.
+**Shivam:** Times then were chaotic, yes, but that was because we were still in the process of making the SOPs and refining the existing ones. Things took an unexpected turn once the Covid cases started rising. When we began sending the Covid +ve people for treatment in the government hospitals, we found out there were terrible facilities therein. Also, when we started converting the hostels into Quarantine centers, things were awful. We arranged all these things at the student level; the admin wasn't even aware that such problems existed. I ensured that oximeters and thermometers were made available in Rajiv Bhawan and proposed the authorities do the same in all the Quarantine Hostels to check on the students so that any mishap doesn't occur. When we raised these issues, the admin made arrangements for doctors two days later, but no efforts were made to make the instruments available for treatment; this was the reason for the lack of treatment in quarantine hostels. The issue related to testing and delay in their reports was negligence from the lab's end. Most of the accredited labs were assigned to handle the rising cases due to the Kumbh. Our admin just assigns the remaining labs to a particular zone, leaving the entire menial work of monitoring their operation to the GenSecs. With the assistance of Deputy PG, I had to personally accompany each lab member to confirm if proper testing was done. In cases of negligence, we discontinued the lab's working and made sure competent ones like Tata provided their services to our students via my personal contacts. We had several meetings with the CMO and relevant authorities where we questioned them for the disregard from their end. However, we've still not received any satisfactory answer for the delay in responding from their side. They directly shrug off the responsibility, putting all the blame on the state. We're trying our level best to raise all these issues to the admin and are hopeful that proper arrangements are made this time to tackle these issues.
 
 
 **WO:** Having approached the previous Gensec and the authorities regarding the incident of the student's tragic death, we were told that the review committee is making a report on the same and that we would be notified soon. The IITR admin clearly demonstrated its inhumane nature and callous attitude in handling this tragic event by reporting the incident in national media without giving a proper explanation, keeping everyone in the dark, and not even holding a condolence meet. Are there any updates on that report?
 
-**Manu:** A Facts Finding Committee(FFC) was set up to make a final report describing the series of events that happened to Mr Prem, 10-15 days prior to his tragic death. A condolence meeting was arranged in the Cautley Bhawan premises a day after his death by a small gathering of students attended by the DOSW. However, we would refrain from making any further comment on this at the request of the victim's family. 
+**Shivam:** A Facts Finding Committee(FFC) was set up to make a final report describing the series of events that happened to Mr Prem, 10-15 days prior to his tragic death. A condolence meeting was arranged in the Cautley Bhawan premises a day after his death by a small gathering of students attended by the DOSW. However, we would refrain from making any further comment on this at the request of the victim's family. 
 
 
 **WO:** A few students complained that the hostels and the departments were not properly sanitized, especially after multiple cases were reported on these premises. What would you comment on the same?
 
-**Manu:** We ensured a proper and timely sanitization of all the hostels. In some hostels like Rajiv Bhawan, it was done around four times daily; the washrooms were cleaned twice. Technically, the Dean Admin and Dean Infra are responsible for ensuring the cleanliness of the departments and labs. Even for the MAC, there's a committee, MAC council, but we made sure it was also properly sanitized and cleaned since it was open to students for recreational activities. So technically, outside messes and hostels, the SAC isn't responsible, but we made sure we raised these issues to the relevant authorities who failed to react. Also, profs and their families continuously went out along with the students, so even that resulted in an upsurge. We even suggested they impose full lockdown for ten days like IITB for everyone; then, things would slowly get back on track. But no one agreed to this. I even mailed the Director when the cases began rising suddenly, but they kept saying we'll get complaints from students if we impose stiff regulations. We even said we'd handle all those complaints, but they didn't agree. 
+**Shivam:** We ensured a proper and timely sanitization of all the hostels. In some hostels like Rajiv Bhawan, it was done around four times daily; the washrooms were cleaned twice. Technically, the Dean Admin and Dean Infra are responsible for ensuring the cleanliness of the departments and labs. Even for the MAC, there's a committee, MAC council, but we made sure it was also properly sanitized and cleaned since it was open to students for recreational activities. So technically, outside messes and hostels, the SAC isn't responsible, but we made sure we raised these issues to the relevant authorities who failed to react. Also, profs and their families continuously went out along with the students, so even that resulted in an upsurge. We even suggested they impose full lockdown for ten days like IITB for everyone; then, things would slowly get back on track. But no one agreed to this. I even mailed the Director when the cases began rising suddenly, but they kept saying we'll get complaints from students if we impose stiff regulations. We even said we'd handle all those complaints, but they didn't agree. 
 
 
 **WO:** A significant rise in the Covid cases was observed when the students were allowed to leave the campus premises for specific periods. Students leaving for trips and frequent gatherings violating social-distancing norms was a typical scene last time. First off, do you think the admin should be blamed for this, considering no pilot tests were conducted on this obvious problem, and the campus gates were opened quite early as compared to other institutes like IITB, where strict regulations were imposed, and students were forced to undergo quarantine for slightly longer periods?
 
-**Manu:** Not just the admin but the students were equally responsible for this. See, for pilot tests, we had proposed this: Before a complete lockdown, in each hostel, we should set up two guards who will monitor the premises 24-7 at the hostel gates itself and not just Institute gates. Also, we would put restrictions on the entry-exit, say only one exit from the hostel each day, that too for 2 hours. We believed that if we're able to control the spread from the hostel itself, we can curb the instances of students going out of campus. And those who didn't follow the protocol should be penalized in the hostel itself, or a suitable warning should be given, and still, if they don't comply, they would be forced to vacate the premises. We proposed this system even before complete lockdown. Again, no one agreed to this, although we made sure such policies were adopted in Rajiv and a few other Bhawans. We shared this provision with each of the Bhawan Council representatives and advised them to impose this locally. However, many students, especially the PhDs, kept rejecting this, citing that such a restriction would create numerous problems. Despite the departments under complete lockdown, several profs demanded that their PhDs be present in the labs and continue the work going against the guidelines. Eventually, we received multiple such claims from several hostels, and since the DOSW didn't sign an official notice, we couldn't force the Bhawan Council members to impose such restrictions. 
+**Shivam:** Not just the admin but the students were equally responsible for this. See, for pilot tests, we had proposed this: Before a complete lockdown, in each hostel, we should set up two guards who will monitor the premises 24-7 at the hostel gates itself and not just Institute gates. Also, we would put restrictions on the entry-exit, say only one exit from the hostel each day, that too for 2 hours. We believed that if we're able to control the spread from the hostel itself, we can curb the instances of students going out of campus. And those who didn't follow the protocol should be penalized in the hostel itself, or a suitable warning should be given, and still, if they don't comply, they would be forced to vacate the premises. We proposed this system even before complete lockdown. Again, no one agreed to this, although we made sure such policies were adopted in Rajiv and a few other Bhawans. We shared this provision with each of the Bhawan Council representatives and advised them to impose this locally. However, many students, especially the PhDs, kept rejecting this, citing that such a restriction would create numerous problems. Despite the departments under complete lockdown, several profs demanded that their PhDs be present in the labs and continue the work going against the guidelines. Eventually, we received multiple such claims from several hostels, and since the DOSW didn't sign an official notice, we couldn't force the Bhawan Council members to impose such restrictions. 
 
 
 **WO:** Having discussed this issue with Shivam, we observed that CCTV-based surveillance was done throughout the campus, and the same was used to identify individuals violating the norms last time. However, there were apparent loopholes, the most important being the lack of cameras set up throughout the campus. In addition to this, the conventional method of keeping track of the students leaving the campus using a manual entry in the registers was followed. This process has several inbuilt flaws, as it is difficult to keep track of all the students using the same. So, did the proposed SOP also focus on this issue, and do you think Rfid cards would've been easily able to solve this issue? Because there hasn't been any update on the same since the last inauguration two years back [(http://watchout.iitr.ac.in/2019/01/rfid-inaugration)](http://watchout.iitr.ac.in/2019/01/rfid-inaugration){: style="text-decoration:underline; color:blue"} and neither you nor the GenSec Tech has included this in your manifestos.
@@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ We would refrain from commenting anything on the discrepancies with the Wellness
 
 **WO:** The issue of soaring hostel and mess fees was discussed since the beginning of the pandemic itself. Firstly, can you justify the current fee structure, and can the students expect some relaxation in the same next semester?
 
-**Manu:** The fee structure gets updated, and there's an increment in the mess fees every two years as per the official rule stated in our document. It was last updated during my tenure, which began in October 2020. After the increment in the mess fees, usually, there's no change in the mess menu. But since last year, to counter this surge, we revamped the entire menu. Previously we only had fruits 3,4 days a week, but now it's made compulsory each day. We've also removed the payment restriction on non-veg food, which will now be served free of cost. Desserts are now offered five times a week; curd items are increased; in general, the mess menu is made heavy. Students currently not present on the campus don't have to pay any food advance fees. Hostel, electricity, and gymkhana fees have been reduced. The mess establishment fees are essential because that charge is used to compensate the salaries and pension of the mess workers. So, besides the mess establishment charge of 9k, we’ve tried our best to reduce the fees by analyzing all loopholes possible [3]. 
+**Shivam:** The fee structure gets updated, and there's an increment in the mess fees every two years as per the official rule stated in our document. It was last updated during my tenure, which began in October 2020. After the increment in the mess fees, usually, there's no change in the mess menu. But since last year, to counter this surge, we revamped the entire menu. Previously we only had fruits 3,4 days a week, but now it's made compulsory each day. We've also removed the payment restriction on non-veg food, which will now be served free of cost. Desserts are now offered five times a week; curd items are increased; in general, the mess menu is made heavy. Students currently not present on the campus don't have to pay any food advance fees. Hostel, electricity, and gymkhana fees have been reduced. The mess establishment fees are essential because that charge is used to compensate the salaries and pension of the mess workers. So, besides the mess establishment charge of 9k, we’ve tried our best to reduce the fees by analyzing all loopholes possible [3]. 
 
 The SAC doesn't have much say in the Institute fees. Our current fee structure is similar to IITK; the only difference is that instead of taking the mess establishment fees, they held a donation drive and compensated the deficit. However, this isn't very feasible in our case. Besides this, as stated earlier, we also compensated the prices like those of free stay in quarantine using SAC funds to ease the student return. Even the issue concerning the fees of 1st years who haven't even visited the campus was raised in the meetings. We suggested a different fee structure since there will be two batches of such students. However, the admin didn't show the approval citing uniformity in the fee structure, and thwarted our proposal. Besides all this, multiple factors need to be taken into account like fee-waivers before students question the fee structure. And as far as the further relaxation in fee structure is concerned, we would refrain from commenting on the same since the actual meeting for the coming semester is yet to happen.