Controversy over new gym changes

The announcement made during week eight that the University sports centre is to undergo extensive refurbishments over the Christmas period, and into second term, has been met with a mixed reaction from students, many of whom are concerned by the prospect of being without gym facilities while the work is carried out.

The move has been prompted by feedback received in the 2011 Warwick Sport review, in which it was highlighted that members felt the gym equipment was dated and regularly damaged, and the facilities often overcrowded.

Of course, efforts to alleviate these problems will benefit students in the long run, as new state of the art equipment provided by gym technology supplier TECHNOGYM is introduced. Yet existing gym members will no doubt be unhappy at the prospect at being without exercise facilities until early February, with the work beginning at the end of the current term.

The £1.5 million agreement with TECHNOGYM is certainly impressive, and will undoubtedly enhance the experience of sports centre customers.

TECHNOGYM has, in the past, supplied equipment to a number of high profile sites, including the Olympic Village and the National Football Centre at Burton. With Sport at Warwick promising to provide new cardiovascular and resistance equipment, as well as state of the art Kenisis line and Arke equipment, the refurbishment will transform the facilities and provide a new experience for customers.

Many existing members, however, are confused by the decision to carry out the work during a period when many would have been relying on the facilities to be available.

Granted the majority of the work is being done during the holiday period, but with the ominously vague projected completion date of “early February”, members are rightly concerned at the prospect of their workout schedule being significantly interrupted.

Many second years and finalists will have been planning to stay at university after term ends to work on coursework, with the expectation being that the gym facilities would be available during this period.

In any case, members face the prospect of at least a month of term time without the facilities available, an issue which becomes problematic when you consider that the majority of members have paid upfront for a year. It seems strange that the prospect of a major refurbishment had not even been mentioned to students before week eight, and that students had no say in whether they would prefer new facilities or their gym being available year-round.

When questioned on why the work cannot be carried out during the summer period, in order to minimise disruption for students, a spokesperson for Warwick Sport responded: “With a summer project students would have missed out on weeks of improved facilities and equipment. There are staff and students who still use the facilities during the summer, so there was no solution that avoided some disruption”.

This raises the question of whether existing students would rather be without gym facilities for at least a month, or to continue to make do with the facilities which have served adequately for a number of years; facilities for which they willingly paid their year-long membership fees.

Some efforts are being made to provide alternatives for members during the period of disruption. The fitness team will be running extra classes and sessions, and will be available to provide advice on maintaining fitness.

On this issue, a Warwick Sport spokesperson promised that “the extra classes are just the start; we’ll monitor member feedback and attendance to classes and constantly review how and where we can better support our members. Some of the gym equipment will be available on the Desso Hall balcony.”

For many students, however, this offer will not be enough, and many will be forced to seek alternate gyms in Leamington Spa and other surrounding areas, or to go without proper training during the disruption.

For the many members who follow specific weight training regimes, for example, extra fitness classes will not serve as a worthwhile alternative. The issue here is that students who have been dedicated to their training will now see the benefits of their hard work reduced as they are forced into a hiatus, or face the alternative of seeking new facilities.

It is conceivable, then, that many members will be obliged to find an alternative gym for the duration of the disruption, a situation which could necessitate them paying gym fees on top of the Warwick Sport memberships they have already, in good faith, taken out. It is not yet clear whether Warwick Sport will offer any form of reimbursement for existing members.

It is safe to say that Warwick Sport’s announcement will divide opinion amongst the student population. Although the long term benefits of the refurbishment are evident, it seems relevant to question whether existing members would sanction the work, had they been given a choice.

Granted, student surveys have suggested a discontent at the condition of equipment, yet it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that the students who complained would not have expected any changes made to disrupt their training schedules to such a degree.

While the University will only benefit from the refurbishments, in having new gym facilities to attract future students, existing customers will undoubtedly feel aggrieved at having the services they have paid for taken away for a considerable period of time. It remains to be seen whether these issues will be addressed, or whether students will be expected to dutifully accept the proposals being forced upon them.