Business
University students like me are happier living at home – here’s why
Iolo CheungBBC Wales and
Ellie CarterBBC Wales
BBCLeaving home to go to university was once considered a rite of passage.
But university student Kirsty Holpin, who lives with her grandmother and drives to lectures each day, says only two of her course mates actually live on campus.
“The rest of us travel in,” says the 23-year-old, who is one of a growing number of students choosing to live at home with family instead of moving into student digs.
UCAS figures suggest the number of students intending to live at home has doubled in the last 20 years, with rising rent cited as a major factor. Other reasons include shifting priorities towards academic study, rather than drinking and socialising.
Now in her third year studying psychology and criminology at the University of South Wales, Kirsty drives 35 minutes from her home in Fochriw, Caerphilly county, to the campus in Treforest, Rhondda Cynon Taf, to attend lectures.
“When we were pricing it up [for halls] it was extortionate,” she said.
“So as a family it was, ‘would you rather stay home, or go and basically work your butt off to make rent?'”
Kirsty admits that the decision did leave her more “isolated” when it came to social opportunities, but doesn’t regret her choice.
‘Not much of a drinker’
Kirsty admits living on campus would have given her a better social life.
“But I’m not much of a social drinker anyway,” she said.
“And I can always travel down to university if I need to for events, and make time for that.
“At home I have a brilliant, supportive environment, so I can get everything done like assignments – if I was at uni halls, I probably wouldn’t have achieved as much as I have.”
She says blended learning has made things easier for her and others, with more lectures now having the option of being attended remotely.
And without the need to be on campus every day, some students are going to extreme lengths.
“There’s a girl I met last year who was travelling from the West Midlands,” says Kirsty.
“She said it’s much easier to book a hotel room and spend £90 a night when she needs to come down, than spend £600 on rent.”
A recent survey by campaign group Save The Student found that 15% of students in the UK now live with parents or guardians – an increase from 12% in 2020 – with average travel times to campus also rising from 21 to 26 minutes.
“It doesn’t sound like a huge change, but if you look at it in terms of the number of students across the UK, that is quite a significant movement,” said spokesperson Tom Allingham.
In Wales, students now spend an average of £473 a month on rent, while in England the average figure is £556 and in Scotland it is £663, according to Save The Student.
“It’s no surprise that we’re seeing this change, because of factors like the availability and cost of housing, and bills,” says Deio Owen, president of the National Union of Students (NUS) in Wales.
“And stories we see all the time about problems in student housing doesn’t help the narrative, it doesn’t entice people to move to student accommodation.”
But priorities may also have shifted, says Mr Owen, with many students not feeling that a campus lifestyle is key to their university experience any more.
“The traditional idea of people going to university to go out drinking and stuff, that’s not necessarily the de facto behaviour of students anymore,” he says.
“People are deciding to stay in, do sober socials, and students’ unions are key for that to work.
“So it’s crucial that any students who decide not to move to a campus-based university, or close by, don’t miss out on that socialising.”
Getty ImagesIsaac Williams, 20, is studying for a Culinary Arts degree at Coleg Llandrillo in Conwy, and says living at his family home and travelling 15 minutes to campus each day “just made sense”.
For him, academic and financial considerations are more important factors than socialising.
“I just want to go to uni so I can get my degree, and have a more successful career,” he says.
“I’ve got a group of friends from other aspects of my life.
“And I have an older brother who’s also staying at home while doing a uni degree. So it just works out well money-wise.”
‘I was getting crazy fomo’
But at the University of South Wales’ freshers event in Cardiff, many students were still keen to embrace the chance to move out of their parents’ house while studying.
“It was just to get the taste of independence, a sort of practice run for living on your own,” said Sophie Davies, 20, from Neath.
Her friend Morgan Lees, 18, from Merthyr Tydfil, added: “Staying at home while being at uni takes away some of the social aspects of it, and that was really important for me.”
Sophie Evans, 20, from Pontypridd, Rhondda Cynon Taf, started off living at home – but only took a month to change her mind and move into university accommodation.
“Everyone else was going out and stuff, I was getting crazy fomo [fear of missing out], and I was booking hotels or staying with people,” she said.
“So I thought it was better if I move away and have that sense of independence, and I did – having to budget by myself and live like a functioning person.”
Joe Williams, 20, from Swansea said the social life had been a key factor in choosing to live on campus.
“Just being around everyone, it was easy,” he said.
“I go back [home] often enough. The costs aren’t too bad, and I was going back home on weekends to work, so it was OK.”
Liv McMahon and
Chris Vallance,Technology reporters
Getty ImagesGrand Theft Auto (GTA) maker Rockstar Games has been accused by a trade union of sacking staff in the UK to stop them from unionising.
The Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which represents people working in the gaming sector, said 31 workers were fired from Rockstar’s UK studios on 30 October.
The union led rallies outside the company’s offices in Edinburgh and London on Thursday to protest what it described as “the most blatant and ruthless act of union busting in the history of the games industry”.
The BBC has approached Rockstar’s parent company, Take-Two Interactive, for comment, which has reportedly claimed staff were sacked for sharing confidential information.
IWGB“Last week, we took action against a small number of individuals who were found to be distributing and discussing confidential information in a public forum, a violation of our company policies,” a Rockstar spokesperson told Bloomberg in a statement.
“This was in no way related to people’s right to join a union or engage in union activities.”
At large video game studios, information about game development is tightly controlled – with employees often signing agreements not to share confidential information.
Rockstar’s upcoming GTA 6 is expected to be one of the best-selling games of all time, with fans clamouring for any news ahead of its May 2026 release date – meaning security around any information will be heightened at the studio.
But union president Alex Marshall accused Rockstar of deflecting from the “real reason” for firing staff – which the IWGB believes is their union involvement.
“They are afraid of hard working staff privately discussing exercising their rights for a fairer workplace and a collective voice,” he said.
“Management are showing they don’t care about delays to GTA 6, and that they’re prioritising union busting by targeting the very people who make the game.”
According to the IWGB, the UK workers fired at the end of October were part of a group discussing forming a union at the company.
Mr Marshall said its only non-Rockstar employees were union organisers.
“We refute that confidential information was shared publicly,” IWGB said in a statement.
Dr Paolo Ruffino, senior lecturer in digital curation and computational creativity at Kings College London, said it was a “textbook” case of non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) being used by gaming firms.
“They’re used at every level in gaming, creating a culture of secrecy that makes investigating working conditions nearly impossible,” he said.
“The real question is whether these dismissals were about leaked information or protected union activity – a distinction UK employment law requires but which NDA allegations make difficult to prove.”
‘Equalising the scales’
Speaking to the BBC at a picket outside the Rockstar North office in Edinburgh, organiser Fred Carter said he was standing alongside staff who had been sacked “without warning” and “without reason”.
“They’ve been fired, we believe, because they’re union members – which is a protected activity in the UK,” he said.
“We’re asking people to come out and support us, to demand their jobs back and demand accountability from Rockstar.”
A former employee speaking at the Edinburgh rally said there was a “power imbalance” at play in conversations with management.
“Not everyone is comfortable speaking up, and even when you do you can get shut down because you’re just one person,” they said.
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire have been cleared to proceed with planned industrial action after the High Court dismissed the company’s last-minute bid to block strikes.
The aerospace giant had sought an injunction against Unite the Union members at its Warton and Samlesbury sites, arguing their planned walkout was unlawful.
However, Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday, stating: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
The ruling paves the way for strikes, which the union said were due to begin on Wednesday and continue until 25 November, following the rejection of a 2025 pay offer.
In written submissions, Bruce Carr KC, representing BAE, contended that Unite had invalidated the strike’s lawfulness by instructing members not to train managers in aircraft testing after giving notice to ballot on 24 September.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between 22 September and 10 October, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after 10 October and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
Workers at BAE Systems in Lancashire can continue to strike following the dismissal of a bid for a High Court injunction aimed at blocking industrial action.
The company asked a judge to order Unite the Union members at the Warton and Samlesbury sites to cease their planned action in a last-minute hearing on Tuesday.
Strikes were due to start on Wednesday and last until November 25, according to the union.
But Mr Justice Soole refused to grant the injunction on Thursday.
He said: “Having considered the evidence, the application is dismissed. I will give my reasons later.”
Bruce Carr KC, for BAE, said in written submissions for the hearing on Tuesday that Unite had given notice to ballot on September 24 after rejecting the 2025 pay offer.
He said that following this, union representatives told members not to train managers in aircraft testing and that this amounted to a call to industrial action, therefore invalidating the lawfulness of the upcoming strike.
The barrister added: “It is the claimant’s case that the evidence clearly demonstrates that at that meeting and thereafter, Unite called on its members employed as quality professionals, to take industrial action in the form of refusing to undertake the training of managers employed by the claimant.”
Mr Carr said that in mid-September BAE wanted the training after “a number of absences” and while it was “considering business continuity plans in the event of possible industrial action”.
This training occurred between September 22 and October 10, after which the quality professionals refused to continue following instructions from the union, Mr Carr said.
These workers breached their duty to BAE because they are “required to act in the best interests of the company to carry out such duties in respect of their appointment as they may reasonably be called upon to undertake”, the barrister added.
Oliver Segal KC, for Unite, said the training was a “request”, not an “instruction” and therefore workers who refused were not in breach of their contract.
He described managers being trained for the testing role as “unprecedented” and that union representatives had asked workers to get the “request” in writing while they seek legal advice.
In written submissions, he said: “The evidence in this case is that the defendant never even suggested, let alone ‘called’ on, its members who are quality professionals to refuse to comply with a management instruction to provide training to management executives.”
Mr Segal said BAE was “ludicrously interpreting” emails between union representatives discussing the training as instructions for union members not to comply.
The barrister also said there was no refusal to train the managers after October 10 and that one of the quality professionals gave a statement saying his team never stopped providing training.
He continued: “The reality is that this application is a last-minute, desperate attempt by the claimant to neuter the industrial action, which is both factually mis-premised and legally misconceived.”
Mr Carr said on Thursday that BAE is considering an appeal.
A BAE spokesperson said: “We note the ruling by the High Court. We believe we had good grounds for the legal challenge and will consider the court’s judgment.
“We respect the right of employees to engage in industrial action and remain committed to a partnership approach with all our trade union groups.”
The PA news agency understands that less than 70 employees out of 12,000 are involved in the strike action while production lines are continuing to operate.
Speaking after the decision, Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “This unsuccessful attempt by BAE to prevent a lawful strike will have severely damaged the goodwill it has with its workforce.
“BAE is a multibillion-pound company making record profits.
“It now needs to come back to the negotiating table with an acceptable offer for striking workers in its Air division, rather than wasting money on pointless legal threats.
“Otherwise, our members will be taking strike action throughout November in their fight for fair pay.”
Rachel Halliday of Thompsons Solicitors, which represented Unite, added: “This is a clear win for Unite and for workers everywhere.
“The High Court has confirmed that the union acted lawfully at every stage, and that BAE’s attempt to block strike action had no basis.
“Today’s decision will send a strong message to employers that the courts cannot be used to silence workers standing up for fair pay and respect.
“Unite acted responsibly throughout, adhering to all statutory requirements, and this important decision reinforces the union’s members’ right to strike.
“Thompsons is proud to have stood with Unite in defending this principle. Working people have the right to be heard – and to take lawful industrial action when negotiations fail.”
Researchers propose a new model for legible, modular software
Clarks Cloudsteppers concept stores opening in Asia, US; plans apparel, athleisure and men’s lines
Prince William waves at crowd as he comes out of public toilet in Rio de Janiro
-
Tech1 week agoUS Ralph Lauren partners with Microsoft for AI shopping experience
-
Tech1 week agoOpenAI says a million ChatGPT users talk about suicide
-
Tech1 week agoHow digital technologies can support a circular economy
-
Tech1 week agoAI chatbots are becoming everyday tools for mundane tasks, use data shows
-
Sports1 week agoBilly Bob Thornton dishes on Cowboys owner Jerry Jones’ acting prowess after ‘Landman’ cameo
-
Fashion1 week agoCalvin Klein launches Re-Calvin take-back programme across the US
-
Business1 week agoTransfer test: Children from Belfast low income families to be given free tuition
-
Sports1 week agoNCAA delays date when bets on pro sports allowed