Yup, still a huge amount either way.
-
-
Replying to @AlisonKillilea
last summer they were saying it was because they were developing their own video software platform but I'd bet money that didn't materialize.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
-
-
I meant in the plans for 2021 they were saying they had to keep costs like this because they were making their own software instead of using Zoom.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @Stewart_Brookes
Wonder what excuse there is to keep costs this high now so!
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AlisonKillilea @AdmiralHip
I’m defo not here to defend the IMC’s fees, but my understanding is that they have permanent staff members working on the programme throughout the year. My guess is that the registration fee pays for their employment.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Stewart_Brookes @AlisonKillilea
That wasn’t how they justified it before. I understand needing to pay your staff but the speakers themselves are providing labour and are having to pay for it.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @AdmiralHip @AlisonKillilea
but that’s how academia (generally) works, isn’t it? We pay to attend conferences & don’t get paid. We submit articles to journals and don’t get paid. We peer review books/articles, etc. and… you know all that. We each will have to decide whether £120 is affordable or worth it.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Stewart_Brookes @AlisonKillilea
Yeah and it’s an untenable system. We provide way too much unpaid labour and research and get exploited and there isn’t anything we can do about it.
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
Well there IS but unions often don’t focus on that and staff unions don’t often include PhDs and masters students.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.