Ballots || USS, Four Fights and Casualisation

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

An overview of how issues and experiences of casualisation resonate with the issues we are balloting over from joint branch casualisation officers Joanne Armitage and Xanthe Whittaker. If you are a casualised member and would like to talk about striking whilst casualised, please contact Joanne or Xanthe.

Four Fights 

The Four Fights dispute encompasses concerns around pay, equality, workload and casualisation. It demands the fair treatment of staff across the sector and these issues all intersect. Casualisation is right at the centre of this dispute. Insecure employment exacerbates issues of equality and fair pay. Fixed-term and hourly-paid contracts are often used to fill up leaky parts of workloads leading to fragmented teaching. Casualised staff get paid less and promotions are more difficult.

Around 50% of teaching-only staff are precariously employed and 68% of researchers. UCU notes that these figures are not improving and there are currently 75,000 members of staff employed on casualised contracts in HE.

Those of us who are precariously employed are well aware of how casualisation feels; it affects our lives and sense of self. But the culture of casualisation erodes rights, protections and security for all staff. Casualisation can make it feel really difficult to complain! Demand better workloads! More pay!

****Vote YES! for secure work****

USS Pension Dispute

What do casualised workers stand to lose? 

* Staff on casual contracts and early career academics will be the most affected by proposed changes to USS; will have a greater proportion of our pension across our career subject to these worse conditions.

* Employee contribution increases will make the scheme even less affordable for more staff on insecure contracts and low pay. Already many casualised staff choose to opt out of the USS scheme

What about intergenerational fairness?

* High rates of opt-out among casualised workers already reflects an unfairness to those on insecure contracts, who face further insecurity in retirement if they have no access to a pension. For some, retirement may be pushed out of reach. Staff who opt out are already losing that part of their income which is made up of the employer contribution to pensions.

* How is the issue of intergenerational fairness resolved by offering early career staff a worse pension scheme? We need a healthy scheme—which USS demonstrably is—that continues to provide defined benefits to all generations, and a stop to the employee contribution hikes which are pricing people out of USS.

* Finally , addressing job insecurity would mean far less reluctance among people to join a scheme when their future in the sector is so uncertain.

Central to UCUs negotiating position on USS is ensuring that USS is accessible and affordable to casualised and low income workers with a plan that would manage the scheme and protect defined benefit pensions even for new entrants.

****Vote YES! for a fair and affordable pension scheme****

In solidarity,

Joanne and Xanthe

Email sent to branch members 27 October 2021 by joint branch anti-casualisation officers Joanne Armitage and Xanthe Whittaker

Ballots graphics to download

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Leeds UCU have made some graphics for members to use during the ballot period: Click on each link to see the graphic full size and download it if you want (right-click and ‘Save Image As). To use an image as a Teams background it needs to be mirrored.

Also UCU HQ have a large set of posters,flyers and graphics you can download from this page (scroll to the bottom) – some that are particularly useful are

Dispute meeting 22 October

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

– a chance to ask national negotiators

Want to know the latest on our two disputes (Four Fights and USS)? Want to ask the UCU negotiators something? Not sure what we want to achieve by taking action?

Come along to our members meeting on Friday 22 October, 1-2 pm (Zoom link in an email from Chloe).  Send your questions in advance, get involved!

Friday’s meeting is for discussion (no motions will be submitted or debated). Robyn Orfitelli from Sheffield (UCU ‘pay and related matters’ negotiator), Deepa Govindarajan Driver from Reading (UCU pensions negotiator) and Vicky Blake (UCU President), will be joining us to give us a brief update and answer your questions.  Please submit questions in advance if you can, using the form in Chloe’s email, which will help the presenters. You can of course raise questions from the floor as well. As this is a disputes meeting it will not be recorded so if you want to ask a question please attend the meeting – and please encourage others to do so as well.

There will also probably be a local meeting in your school or service – look out for a message from your departmental rep – and they will greatly appreciate your help in talking to colleagues and encouraging everyone to vote. It is crucial that everyone plays their part in union democracy by voting in the ballots.

Ballot papers should have arrived by Thursday 21st October, to the address you have on myUCU which for most people will hopefully be your home address. (Remember, trade union law says balloting must be done by post rather than electronically). If you do not receive your ballot paper, there will be a form on the UCU website from Friday 22nd October to order a new ballot paper to be sent.   FAQs about the ballot are at https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/11810/GTVO-HE-ballots-2021

This is a short ballot period – the closing date is 4th November at noon, but realistically you should plan to get your ballot in the post by 1st November to ensure it arrives in time. A first class reply envelope is provided.  So get those ballots in the post asap, and encourage your colleagues to vote too. We hope to have the result by Monday 8th November. The branch will hold an Emergency General Meeting at1pm on Tuesday 9th November to discuss the outcome of the ballot and consider next steps. We understand that we will have the opportunity as a branch to feed into national decisions about, for example, the nature and extent of industrial action, and this meeting is how we will decide what our position is – so please put the date in your calendar now (link will follow nearer the time) and come and make your voice heard.

Further information:

Vote now! Vote #YesYesYesYes!

You can download some ballot graphics (including the infographic below) here: www.leedsucu.org.uk/ballots-graphics-to-download

UCU, COP26 and the university Climate Plan

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

At a UK level, UCU is part of the Trade Union Coordinating Group, campaigning for action on the climate crisis and for climate justice, which work is particularly urgent in the lead up to COP26, and together with the National Union of Students, we are campaigning for universities to decarbonise and decolonise.

At Leeds, seven ‘Climate principles’ were agreed back in 2019, and subsequently the Sustainability Service worked hard, along with students and staff, to develop a Climate Plan, in order to reach the agreed ‘net zero by 2030’ target. However, this Climate Plan has not been adopted, no significant action has yet been taken, and there has been no strategic investment to reduce carbon emissions. Leeds UCU  agreed a motion on these issues at our General Meeting on 7th October 2021 and the two emails below come out of that:

  1. Message to UCU members from the branch Climate and Ecological Crisis Working Group
  2. Letter from all three campus trade unions to the Vice Chancellor about the university Climate Plan

If you’d like to get involved with this work at Leeds, you can join the branch Climate and Ecological Crisis Working Group – email ucu@leeds.ac.uk for details.

1. Message to UCU members from the branch Climate and Ecological Crisis Working Group

COP26 starts very soon, and we as a union need to do everything we can to raise climate awareness and to campaign on this issue. We’d like to highlight some key opportunities for colleagues to get involved.

  • UCU have worked with the NEU, NUS and others to launch a Climate Themed Learning Month this November, which we would encourage all staff to take part in. Take a look at the range of resources available, and get your students thinking about the climate crisis this November whilst the spotlight is on the global negotiations in Glasgow.
  • From 7-10 November, UCU are taking part in the COP26 Coalition’s People’s Summit, as an alternative to business as usual of false solutions and inaction at the COP negotiations. The summit will be held both in-person in Glasgow and online.

This is a critical time to raise our union voice for climate justice, join us!

Leeds UCU Climate and Ecological Crisis Working Group

2. Letter from all three campus trade unions to the Vice Chancellor about the university Climate Plan

Sent: 18 October 2021 14:41
To: Simone Buitendijk
Subject: The Climate Crisis and the University’s Climate Plan

Dear Simone, 

We are writing because we are concerned by our institution’s lack of progress towards meeting the crucial targets required to achieve net zero by 2030. We were encouraged when Council approved the Seven Climate Principles more than two years ago. However, we are very concerned about the lack of progress made by the University since that time and are particularly concerned at the failure to put the principles into action.  

As active citizens of our University community, staff and students have been following closely and contributing to the development of the Climate Plan for nearly three years. However, we were last consulted on it in April this year, when we were told it would go to Council for approval in May. Six months later and we have heard no updates on its progress – the silence is deafening. Given the urgency with which we need to tackle the climate emergency, this delay makes us extremely anxious and makes us doubt the University’s commitment to this vital issue.  

Therefore, we ask you urgently to update us on the state of development of our Climate Plan. What processes are in place for its implementation and what are the timelines? We cannot allow this to be delayed from one Council meeting to the next, as it has been for the last 18 months. 

In announcing the staff stoppage for the global climate strike in September, the For Staff news article stated that: “We’re committed to taking action on climate change through our Seven Climate Principles, and we use these to guide all University activity in moving towards a sustainable, low-carbon future”. 

We would like to know how the commitment to take action on climate has been realised in the past 12 months? What aspects of the Seven Climate Principles have been implemented and with what results? 

We would also like to hear about representation structures available to staff and students providing feedback and sharing concerns about matters related to climate and sustainability? Further, we would like to understand what the future official channels available for staff and students will look like to feed into the ongoing nature of the “live” Climate Plan?  

An update on progress for sign off and implementation of the Climate Plan is well overdue.  We would also expect to receive an update about the investment planning needed to make sure that the Climate Plan delivers its goals. After 27 months, we truly believe there is no more time available for delays. We also do not see reason for the COVID-19 pandemic delaying the implementation of the Climate Plan any further, especially in light of the rising income stream of the University given unprecedented student recruitment. We are facing a global emergency and appropriate funding should be released as a matter of urgency.  

Also, it is not clear to us how and in what form academic support “to evaluate the business case for adopting net zero based on the Stern Review” will be used. We have serious concern about the reference to a “business case” to evaluate and justify the reduction of carbon emissions. As a research-based and educational institution we should be acting in the public good regardless of any business case. We really do not see how such approach can be driven by values as you regularly proclaim.  

Finally, in light of your recent communication (eNews 15/09.21) and the information available on the website (Climate Plan | Sustainability Service | University of Leeds ) we understand that the Climate Plan for our University is due to be released in 2021.  

Please can you clarify the timeline of activity from now to its release date, which given Christmas closure, we assume will be no later than mid-December? 

We look forward to receiving your answers to our questions. And we would very much welcome a meeting with you where staff and students can hear your answers and ask additional questions in the spirit of our values-driven mission as a University. 

If we are shown a genuine willingness to tackle this issue, we very much look forward to working with you to achieve these goals. 

Yours sincerely, 

Chloe Wallace: Branch President, Leeds University UCU
Jo Westerman: Branch Chair, Leeds University Unite
Nick Allen: Branch Chair: Leeds University Unison 

Islamophobic hate incidents

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Branch president Chloe Wallace responds to Islamophobic hate incidents on campus

UCU opposes all forms of racism. Some staff have recently been targeted with Islamophobic literature sent  to their Leeds University addresses.  Leeds University UCU condemns the Islamophobic incidents and we stand in solidarity with our members and all others affected.  This is not the first time such Islamophobic hate incidents have occurred on our campus in recent years and we aim to bring together all members and anti-racists to help put a stop to it.  We ask the University of Leeds to make a similar statement, including an assertion that Islamophobia is a form of racism.

UCU Update

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Email from Leeds UCU Branch President to members 11th October 2021

I hope that this (somewhat exhausting) term is treating you well. In this email I wanted to briefly give you an account of what union officers have been doing on your behalf in relation to some of the issues on which we are currently campaigning.

  1. Anti-casualisation campaign. In January 2022  it will be three years since we put in our local anti-casualisation claim to the university – you can find the text of the claim here. Since that time, we have taken strike action in support of our national claim. We have heard occasional warm words from management, but across the university staff on fixed term contracts have continued to be made redundant, or made to apply for what are effectively their own jobs. Worryingly, over the summer, a new form of contract, known as an ongoing annualised contract, was introduced (without trade union consultation) which manages to make already precarious employees even more precarious, by requiring them to commit to an ongoing contract with a tiny number of guaranteed of hours, no clear progression or and, it seems, no access to the redeployment register. Officers have spent many hours in discussion with HR, leading to a situation where a major project on ‘contract types’ has been defined which is likely to take many months. Management have explicitly refused to commit to using this process to reduce the use of precarious contracts within our University. Caseworkers have supported staff in seeking permanent or extended contracts, an often distressing process exacerbated by the stress which job insecurity creates: casualisation, we are regularly reminded, is a health and safety issue. Whatever words we might hear from management, as we approach a ballot on a dispute in which our national anti-casualisation will take centre stage, we need action now to support staff currently casualised, as well as strategic planning for the future and and we are not seeing it.
  2. Workload. Reps and members are reporting unprecedented levels of workload and associated stress and ill health. Again, we have taken national strike action on this matter and thought it could not get worse – but it did. What was required of us all during the pandemic was excessive and in many cases unreasonable. And yet there was more to come. Chronic failure properly to staff services such as IT and the Student Education Service, which campus trades unions have been protesting for years, is harming staff in those services and having a knock on effect elsewhere, particularly in areas impacted by massive over recruitment of undergraduates. The causes of that over recruitment were  not within the control of the University: the fact that the Schools and Services on the frontline of this crisis are already exhausted, have been unable to take sufficient annual leave and are in many cases understaffed, could have been avoided. Also within the control of management is the introduction of new systems and process, and requirement to engage in major strategic developments on top of already excessive workloads. Our management have failed to take responsibility for the health and wellbeing of their staff, and we need to see urgent action now. We are currently seeking discussions with management on this matter.
  3. Response to the COVID-19 situation. As most of us are now aware, the change of policy on face coverings was introduced too late, poorly communicated and compliance is too low. We were promised a series of FAQs for staff around how to approach and enforce this policy, which, by the end of week 2, has still not materialised. Many universities in England are doing better that this to protect their staff and students – government guidance is clearly not the barrier. I note again that the people suffering most from this are those who have, or live with people who have, clinical vulnerabilities, who are telling us that they feel now they have to choose between protecting themselves from COVID-19 and the benefits of some renewed in-person contact with colleagues and students, which is making a huge difference for some of us in mental health terms. This is not what an inclusive University looks like. 

All of these issues are causing stress and distress right now to staff across the University. The answer to this should not be individualised: it is a sign of a broken institution and a broken sector, and the answer is to fix what is broken. I do want to acknowledge the incredibly important work done to support staff by colleagues in Staff Counselling and Occupational Health. Both services accept self referrals and are available if you just want a one-off informal conversation, as well as more sustained support, so please do make use of them if you need to.

Many thanks to all those who attended our General Meeting on Thursday 7th October – we set some important policy as well as changing some of our rules. You will see from those motions particular concerns about wholesale and anti-democratic changes to our University governance structures, and serious concern about the University’s willingness to put their money where their mouth is when it comes to the Climate Crisis. We will be in touch with you with more details and information about what you can do to fight back.

One thing that you can do, of course, is to prepare yourself to vote in the industrial action ballots, due to start on 18th October. I emailed you with more information about this on 23rd September. We will be holding some non-motion focused members meetings to discuss and answer your questions, including one for migrant members, and one for fixed term and hourly paid staff. Please watch out for more information on this. If you haven’t already, ensure that your address and phone number are up to date on MyUCU, prepare yourself to vote – and to let us know when you have voted, so that the branch can do everything we can to get the 50% turnout required by anti-union legislation and show management that we mean business.

In solidarity

Chloe
Dr Chloe Wallace
President, Leeds University UCU
Associate Professor in Law
School of Law
University of Leeds
Co-Director, Centre for Innovation and Research in Legal Education
Programme Leader, School of Law 4 year programmes
@chloew1970

Substantive motions passed at General Meeting 7 October 2021

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

The following motions were passed by the branch.

University Climate Plan

This branch notes that:

  1. The university strategy includes commitment to working to solve global challenges including the climate crisis change. The University is also a key partner in the Leeds Climate Commission and the Yorkshire and Humber Climate Commission.
  2. Leeds is a major research university with research in all sectors that potentially or actually can impact on factors mitigating against climate change.
  3. Increasing numbers of UCU members are directly involved in research and community activism to promote a just transition to zero carbon
  4. Much work has gone into developing a Climate Plan (by Sustainability in conjunction with many staff and students across the university) which would provide a detailed and time-sensitive pathway to enact the 7 Climate Principles already agreed.
  5. After more than 2 years since the publication of the 7 Principles, this Climate Plan has not yet been agreed by university Council, who have instead set up further discussion groups. What is most concerning is that the University of Leeds Council has not allocated any resource for climate initiatives amongst the £67 million strategic investments it has agreed at its last meeting in August 2021.

This branch believes that:

  1. The university must show leadership in the sector and the region by taking effective action and following the Climate Plan to reduce its own carbon emissions as one of the largest employers in the region and to reach the net zero target spelled in the principles (by 2030).
  2. It is unacceptable that no strategic funding has been allocated for climate-related actions.
  3. The agreement by the VC to the trade unions’ request for paid time off to support the Youth Climate Strike on 24th September was welcome but real action at the organisational level is needed too as a matter of urgency.

This branch resolves to:

  1. Work with student groups and other interested parties to campaign for the Climate Plan to be agreed and funded, by:
    1. Writing to university Council and the Vice Chancellor
    1. Carrying out a social media campaign to expose the university’s delay in taking action   
    1. Sending speakers and committee members to other climate campaign meetings
  2. Work with the University to foster and enhance research in all sectors that mitigate against climate change.
  3. To encourage members to use trade union teaching materials in their teaching during Climate Learning Month in November, to time with COP26
  4. To share COP26 campaigning information with members
  5. To negotiate with the university that appropriate time off for union duties is allocated to ‘green reps’ who are going to play a key role in supporting the university community to achieve a just transition to net zero.

Curtailment of Senate and Council Democracy at the University of Leeds

Leeds Uni UCU condemns the duplicitous behaviour of our employers who produce blogs and staff comms expressing their respect for staff whilst including a number of proposals to curtail democracy and remove staff involvement in decision making via its governance review paper recommendations to Senate  : CL-20-85 Governance Review.pdf . These recommendations include:

  1. reduction in size of Senate to 80 members
  2. abolition of elected staff member seats on University Council
  3. removal of eligibility for academic related (professional/managerial) staff to be elected to Senate –  only those in teaching and/or research roles to be eligible for election to Senate
  4. Senate to be restricted to strategic, policy-oriented, monitoring and governance matters related to academic issues (not operational issues which may impact on staff working lives)
  5. Removal of that part of the Senate roles and responsibilities statement which includes:  “may discuss and declare an opinion on any matter whatsoever relating to the University”.
     (https://www.leeds.ac.uk/secretariat/documents/senate_statement_of_role_and_responsibilities.pdf)

The UCU branch resolves to:

  1. Make public this undermining of the extremely limited scope for democracy that existed at the University of Leeds.
  2. Formally request that the above items are removed from the recommendations.
  3. Lodge a formal dispute with our employers about the disenfranchisement of academic-related staff and the erosion of democracy if the University fails to undertake 2.
  4. Discuss at the next GM forms of industrial action to be taken in pursuit of 2.

 

Motion 7 University response to COVID-19 

This branch notes

  • that COVID-19 case, hospitalisation and death rates are higher now than they were a year ago and that COVID-19 therefore still presents a significant risk to community health; 
    • that, whilst the government has abandoned shielding requirements for clinically vulnerable and clinically extremely vulnerable people, such people remain particularly vulnerable to the effects of COVID-19; 
    • that campus trades unions have been kept at arms length by the University when discussing their responses to this, with no trade union representation on the COVID group, Transitional Ways of Working Group, or Future Ways of Working Group 

This branch believes 

  • that a number of mitigations, include the wearing of face coverings, are necessary to contain the spread of COVID-19 
  • that an organisation that aspires to be an inclusive community needs to put the needs of the most vulnerable members of that community of the heart of its policy making and communication; 
  • that the best way of ensuring that University policy meets the needs of the whole community is to involve the campus trades unions in decision making 

This branch resolves 

  • to continue to press the University to encourage and require the use of face coverings on university premises 
  • to continue to insist that staff vulnerable to COVID-19, or who live with those who are, are proactively enabled to continue to work from home; 
  • to call on the University to include campus trades unions in the decision making of the COVID group and the Future Ways of Working Group;
  • to lodge a formal dispute with the University if these matters are not satisfactorily resolved 

Branch rule change motions passed at General Meeting 7 October 2021

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

The following motions were passed by the branch to amend our local rules.

Motion 1 (rule change): amend branch Standing Orders to introduce word limits on motions and amendments

Append additional paragraph to section 6 of branch standing orders (‘Motions’) as follows:

“Motions must be no longer than 250 words, with a title of not more than 10 words.  Amendments must be no longer than 75 words, not counting rubrics or words to be deleted. There shall be no word limits for motions to amend the rules or amendments thereto.”

Rationale:

1) a word limit encourages members proposing motions to be concise and to concentrate on what they what the branch to decide, rather than long explanations of the context

2) a word limit makes it easier for members to grasp what they are being asked to decide about

Motion 2 (rule change): department reps

This branch notes:

  • that active department reps are central to a well organised branch;
  • that our current rules do not specify terms of office or a particular election process for department representatives;

This branch believes:

  • that a clear election process for reps will enhance our democratic structures and help more people work actively on organising within our branch

This branch resolves to enact the following change to local rules.

Rule 29 delete and replace with

29        Department reps

Members are encouraged to elect representatives for their school/unit/service. The available roles and the boundaries of the departments will be determined by the committee. Such departments are not formal sub-branches. Department reps are not empowered to negotiate or respond to consultation on behalf of the union.

29.1    Election of department reps and term of office

Department rep elections will normally be biennial, with elections held in the weeks following the Annual General Meeting in an election year. Where there are vacancies the committee will hold by-elections in the weeks following the Annual General Meeting in a non-election year, except that the committee may choose not to hold by-elections for department rep roles in a department with ten or fewer members where there is at least one department rep unless there is an indication that a member wishes to stand for election to a vacant role. The committee may decide to hold a by-election for a vacant role at any time during the year. The term of office will normally be until the next election in two years. The term of office for a department rep elected at a by-election will be until the next normal election.

29.1.1 Notice of elections

The honorary secretary will take all reasonable steps to give members at least 14 days to make nominations. The closing date for nominations will normally be between 14 and 28 days after the Annual General Meeting. The committee or department reps may wish to organise a meeting of members in the department for the start of the election period to encourage nominations and/or on the closing date for nominations.

29.1.2 Returning Officer and scrutineers

The local committee will appoint a returning officer and two scrutineers for elections who will not be candidates.

29.1.3 Nominations

To be eligible for election a member must be a member of the branch who is in that department and have been nominated by two members of the branch who are that department. The honorary secretary, or, in their absence, the branch president, vice president, immediate past president or another branch officer, in that order, may decide to accept nominations from members of the branch who are not in that department where there are five or fewer members in the department. Nominations and the written consent of the nominee must be in writing and signed. If there have been no nominations for a role and if a department members meeting has been convened for the closing date and after the closing time for nominations, nominations to fill remaining vacancies may be made from the floor of the meeting. These must be followed up by written nominations as the meeting will not be minuted.

29.1.4 Elections

If there is only one eligible candidate for any vacancy that candidate will be declared elected and the honorary secretary will take all reasonable steps to notify members in the department within seven days.

If there is either more than one eligible candidate for any vacancy, and if the candidates do not wish to share the role or one of them seek amended nominations for a role with no nominations, a ballot of the members of the Branch who are in that department will be conducted in accordance with rule 10.

29.1.5 Disagreements about department

In the event of a disagreement about whether a member is in the department for the purpose of the department rep election a ruling will be made by the honorary secretary or, in their absence, the branch president, vice president, immediate past president or another branch officer, in that order.

29.2    Covering other departments

In the event of a vacancy for a department rep role the committee may appoint an existing UCU rep to temporarily cover that role.

29.3    Removal from office

Members in a department can test confidence in a department rep by requesting a new election. The honorary secretary will start a new election process within fourteen days of receiving requests in writing from at least five members, or 25% of the membership, whichever is lower, of that department. The honorary secretary may refuse to call a new election if they believe confidence in the department rep has recently been tested and the requests are vexatious.

Any department rep may be removed from office under the process described in rule 12.

Add “or department rep” to rule 12 Removal from office to read: “Any member of the committee (including the officers and other persons elected to represent the Branch) or department rep may be removed from office by resolution at a general meeting …”

 

Motion 4 (rule change): aligning terms of office to academic year

Delete from rule 9.3: “The committee and officers shall hold office with effect from the 1st August following the AGM to the following 31st of July.”

Minutes of extraordinary general meeting 20 August 2021

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Extraordinary General Meeting
1pm – 2pm, Friday 20 August 2021
Video meeting on Zoom

Minutes

Noted that chat will not be open during meeting, except that members can use the chat to message the meeting hosts if they prefer to use text when called to speak, or to ask questions.

Update on disputes

Chloe Wallace, branch president: 
On USS, the employers (Universities UK – UUK) have proposed a package to deal with the purported deficit, which will cut benefits especially for early career staff. Talks are ongoing but our UCU negotiators are seeking industrial power to support them in order to get somewhere with the negotiations.
On Four Fights, the pay offer for 2020-21 was zero, for 2021-22 it’s 1.5%, and very limited offers on casualisation, workloads and equality. This is unacceptable especially given how hard we’ve all been working during the pandemic. One of the achievements of the last industrial action was serious negotiations on the three non-pay issues, which are structural and sector-wide not local. The employers (UCEA) now seem to be backing off from negotiating on these, now just offering ‘working groups’. Negotiations are ongoing but our negotiators need industrial power behind them to get anywhere.
On both disputes, we are being asked as a union to decide how much leverage we will give our negotiators.  UCU Congress in 2021 made some general decisions – a continued commitment to all of the four fights and to keeping them together, agreement to reject the 1.5% pay offer and to enter into dispute. It also discussed campaigns and strategy. On USS, if negotiations aren’t successful and employers won’t budge, Congress agreed to move to ballot also. There are also legal actions on USS in the pipeline.
HE Sector Conference on 9th September will now decide what next, and this meeting is to feed in from Leeds to that conference.

Mark Taylor Batty, branch pensions rep:
UCU negotiators have been working on USS for months and our arguments have all been rejected. The Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) have to respond to the valuation – by agreeing changes to benefits and contributions. UUK are wanting to push through their proposals which include a two-tier scheme and reductions in benefits. UCU can put a counter proposal, but are still discussing what counter proposal to put – either a ‘no deficit’ proposal whereby employers meet the whole of the contributions increase, or a proposal which is more of a compromise. Any UCU counter proposal would probably be rejected as the chair always sides with UUK.
USS have rejected the idea of doing a 2021 valuation although their arguments against it have been disproved.  There are also legal challenges but legal action is not a solution on its own.
Members will know that we are due to see an 11% rise in our contributions in October, which is a result of the 2018 valuation.
Industrial action is the only way to get employers to back down. It’s an unhappy situation but we can’t let these changes go through.  It’s not a question of whether we strike but when.

Vicky Blake, UCU president
We need to decide as a union whether and how to link the two disputes, which is why the forthcoming sector conference is so important. This meeting will advise our delegate to the sector conference, who will set policy on this, which the Higher Education committee will then implement by taking the statutory decisions about balloting and industrial action.
The most important thing is that, whatever the debates and disagreement we have within the union, that once decisions are democratically taken that we all stick by them and stick together to do whatever is decided.
The employer bodies wont move without us taking a stand.  Since Covid they think they can get away with anything, and we need to hold them to account. They need to be clear about how serious we are about improving things for all of our members, and to be worried about what we will do. They need to be motivated to work with us. We must be solid in pursuing this. 

Questions:

1) We’ll need funds to support members if we take strike action. What’s the situation with our local fighting fund and the national strike fund?

A: Our local fund is very healthy.  We were able to pay all the claims that members put in during 2018-2020 and the fund still has £25k, thanks to generous donations.

A: Nationally the strike fund is good but has a lot of demands on it – there are local disputes over redundancies and H&S issues, and a big dispute coming soon in Further Education.  So it’s important to keep raising money for it.  Look out for more fundraisers coming soon, and if you can personally donate that would be great.  Note also that part of the strike fund comes from member subs, so the more members we have the more that fund grows.

2) What is our membership density?

A: It varies across the university – very strong in some areas and less so in others.  Our membership grew considerably during the 2019-20 dispute and continued to grow a little during Covid.
Our power depends on how many members we have and how many are willing to take action. So it’s important to keep recruiting as many members as possible. Please ask your colleagues to join!

3) What is the position of our VC on USS, has it changed after the Big Conversation?

A: No change. She supports UUK line.  We know however that she is very concerned about the possibility of industrial action.

Comments:

Megan Povey:  We are dealing with intransigence of our employers and USS. The choice of valuation date was designed to undermine the value of the pension scheme, so as to get away from Defined Benefit and get the pensions risk off university accounts, which supports marketisation and privatisation.  Our VC has said that DB is unaffordable. Fighting for pensions is fighting for our sector. 

Gabriella Alberti: The state of our sector is worrying – lots of disputes, redundancies, non-continuation of FTCs and casualisation getting worse.  But maybe we have more leverage and bargaining power now?  From things like students being bribed to defer, sector becoming less appealing to join.

Branch motion – Progressing the Four Fights and USS disputes

This branch notes that:

  1. UCU paused the USS and ‘Four Fights’ disputes during the pandemic.
  2. UCEA imposed a 0% pay rise last year and their ‘final offer’ of 1.5% this year is below inflation.
  3. despite progress during 2020 negotiations, UCEA are now not making any substantial offers on casualisation, workload and equality.
  4. UUK have not joined UCU to pressure USS and the Pensions Regulator to cancel the 2020 valuation and use a moderately prudent approach in 2021.
  5. Pension contributions will rise in October to 11% of salary.
  6. UUK’s proposals on USS are likely to mean lower pension benefits, a two-tier scheme which disadvantages early career members, and further contribution increases

This branch believes that:

  1. The four fights and pensions issues are inextricably linked. Low pay, pay inequality and job insecurity all lead to poorer pensions and a worse retirement. Casualised and low paid members may not be able to afford to join the USS pension scheme at all.
  2. It is in all our interests to make sure that everyone has fair pay, good working conditions (including a reasonable workload), job security, and a decent future pension.
  3. Employers would seek to divide us, pitting those with relative job security who are worried about their pensions against those whose main concerns are low pay, equality and casualisation. So solidarity across roles and job types is vital – we must stand together rather than only caring about what affects us personally.
  4. This solidarity was strong during the action in 2019-2020 and we must reinvigorate it now.

This branch resolves to:

  1. Make clear to UCU centrally that we believe co-ordinating the disputes is essential.
  2. Campaign locally on the four fights and pensions campaigns together.
  3. Hold local UCU meetings across the university during the start of the autumn term to discuss the disputes and plan the campaign.
  4. Work with student groups to seek their support, particularly to pressure management to use Leeds’ influence within the employer bodies to make substantial progress in both disputes.
  5. Work closely with our sister campus trade unions on campaigning.
  6. Prepare for industrial action balloting by developing a strong local ‘Get The Vote Out’ strategy.

Proposed by Ben Plumpton. Seconded by Simon Hewitt.

Comments

Joe Kanuritch: Putting the two disputes together is important. On the picket line, talking to colleagues who aren’t members or public, it was good to have different issues to explain, most would support some of the 5 things. Would be a shame to take separate action.

Lata Narayanaswamy: Support the motion. Struck by how much money the university seems to have on getting students to defer. Staff are consistently not a priority.

[48 people in meeting so quorate.
Votes for 42, Votes against 0, Abstentions 3]

The motion was carried.

Motion to be submitted to Higher Education Sector Conference (HESC) – Combining Four Fights and USS disputes

HESC believes that:

  1. The four fights and USS issues are inextricably linked. Low pay, pay inequality and job insecurity mean poorer pensions and a worse retirement, and some members cannot afford pension contributions.
  2. Solidarity between different groups of members (casualised/permanent, different pay grades, equality groups, academic/related, pre- and post-92 branches) was hugely important during the 2019-2020 industrial action.
  3. Continued solidarity will be vital to winning the disputes and for building the union.
  4. It is therefore crucial not to separate the disputes or give priority to either.

HESC resolves to:

  1. Coordinate the four fights and USS campaigns, highlighting the links.
  2. Give parity to both disputes in strategic planning, balloting and publicity, ensuring that all affected branches have a voice in developing the dispute strategy.
  3. Ballot and take action on both disputes concurrently.
  4. Coordinate action with sister unions, if possible, to improve effectiveness.

(149 words)

Proposed by Ben Plumpton, seconded by Aisha Walker.

Questions

1) Some people at the university are in the TPS pension scheme because of legacy from being employed somewhere else – can they participate in the USS dispute?

A: Yes all full members in participating branches can participate in industrial action ballots and action. (Note that this doesn’t include retired members, student members, unemployed members or members likely to be on long term maternity, parental or sick leave during the period of any action. Postgraduate student members on the full free membership are entitled to vote)

[48 people in meeting so quorate.
Votes for 43, Votes against 0, Abstentions 3]

The motion was carried.

President’s closing comments

Chloe Wallace will submit the motion for the Higher Education Sector Conference (HESC) on 9th September.

Committee will endeavour to find a way for members to discuss and comment on the agenda for HESC once that is published.

Minutes of general meeting 5 July 2021

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Minutes of the extraordinary general meeting 17 June 2021

Item not taken (meeting started informally)

Motion 1 Defend the right to a private life and academic freedom

UCU Notes that Council Paper CL/20/74 (27 May 2021):

  1. Summarises an investigation by the UoL of an event which ‘did not take place under the formal auspices of the University’, ie. an event under the aegis of groups ‘not associated with the University of Leeds or LUU’.
    1. Seeks ‘to develop and implement clear guidance on the appropriate use of designations and/or affiliation of University of Leeds roles (e.g. member of staff or student of the University) in non-University public events’.  In so doing the University breaks custom and practice.

UCU contends that:

  1. UoL Council has no authority or standing in presuming to preside over individuals’ private lives.
    1. In presuming to uphold a recommendation that may limit academic freedom and freedom of speech, Council’s predominantly non-academic and lay membership was not suitably qualified to understand the issues in front of it.
      1. The UoL decision would set a dangerous precedent for the entire HE sector.

UCU demands that:

  1. Council retracts the deeply flawed Council Report CL/20/74, and accordingly also the Scott enquiry report of which the Council Report is a summary. 
  2. Council desists from making decisions on academic freedom and freedom of expression without due process, such as Senate scrutiny and negotiation with the UCU.
  3. Council desists from making decisions in spheres over which it has no authority, including the private lives, political beliefs and personal activities of staff and students.

Proposed by committee. Motion carried.

Motion 2

In every dispute about personal behaviour, both sides should be heard.

Proposed by Haiko Muller. Motion carried.

Motion 3 – Digital Working group

This branch agrees to set up a Digital Working Group, to consider digital working, digital transformation, online work and related issues. The Group will make recommendations and report to the branch committee. The Group will be convened by a committee member and open to all members to join.

Proposed by the committee. Motion carried.

Update on local consultations and negotiations

Discussion about consultations with the employer over workload, anti-casualisation, covid safety and transitional and future ways of working.

Matters arising from the minutes of the extraordinary general meeting 17 June 2021

No items raised.