Leeds UCU is working hard to end casualised contracts in UK Higher Education. We think everyone at Leeds and other institutions should have a secure job, and that it is unacceptable that people live without knowing if they will be able to pay their rent or not due to precarious working conditions. Through our Anti-casualisation roadshow, Ignition (October 2018), the subsequent Anti-casualisation claim (January 2019) and our broader campaigns for fair pay we have highlighted the challenges faced by precariously employed staff and research students on teaching contracts and demanded the university pay attention.
To keep in touch with anti-casualisation news more broadly, follow Leeds Anticasualisation news @casualsleeds and nationally @UCUAnti_Cas. (The hashtag #zinesagainstprecarity may also be of interest as contains some great creative critiques of the current state of UK HE.)
Joint Statement of the University of Leeds and University of Leeds UCU regarding the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS)
The University of Leeds and the Leeds Branch of UCU are issuing this joint statement to mark their commitment to work collaboratively to advocate for a fair, affordable and sustainable pension scheme for members. It is clear from consultation responses that employee members greatly value the benefits provided by the USS pension as part of their employment reward package. Whilst they would prefer lower contributions and preserved benefits, consultation demonstrates that members are prepared to pay more in the short term to preserve pension benefits.
The University and the Leeds UCU believe that;
employer and employee members share a common interest in ensuring the USS is a fair, affordable and sustainable pension scheme.
the USS scheme should be responsive to the needs of both employers and employees and that this is a central aspect of making the scheme attractive and preventing members from opting out.
the USS Trustee should now be asked to consider a revised schedule of contributions and that should any upside arise from either a new schedule of contributions and recovery plan for 2020 and/ or a future valuation of the scheme’s assets and liabilities, improving the benefits for employee members of the USS should be a priority.
the optimal timing for the next valuation should be considered and then concluded in an expeditious timescale. We call on the USS Trustee to commit to prepare valuations which are evidence based and when conditions allow moderately prudent, and that they should lobby for a regulatory environment that recognises the unique nature of the Higher Education sector, with a view to schemes such as USS being able to take a different attitude to asset investment and de-risking.
USS should continue to be run on the basis that it remains an open scheme with a commitment from employers to a strong covenant which enables investment into growth assets and returns on investments that improve the value of the scheme for employee and employer members; Employers should continue to provide covenant support through the future valuation process and agree that this should be available to benefit proposals presented to the JNC by either UUK or UCU to ensure open and timely discussions.
USS should be asked to develop a credible/feasible plan for divesting from fossil fuels.
UUK, UCU and USS should support the rebuilding of trust through a transparent and evidence based approach to communications, that includes rapidly and publicly correcting any emerging errors of fact. This should include a commitment to treating consultations on UCU and UUK proposals respectively, in a transparent manner.
proposals for governance reform of the scheme should be urgently developed and progressed and UUK and UCU should be jointly and actively engaged in the related joint workstream. Transparency of governance of USS to be increased.
as soon as possible, over-arching high level sector-wide equalities impact assessments (EIAs) should be carried out and published to understand any direct or indirect discrimination arising from any scheme changes or options proposals. UCU and UUK should actively engage in the workstreams to explore an attractive and affordable range of options to enable all staff to participate in the scheme.
the maintaining a meaningful Defined Benefit element within the scheme is a principle which we support, whist also recognising that a well performing defined contributions scheme may provide enhanced benefits for some.
University Response to the UCU Four Heads of Claim
Casualisation
The University is committed to a Review of Employment Terms, which includes responding to the Leeds UCU anti-casualisation claims. Work on this began in 2020 and has included engagement with the TUs from its commencement. It is acknowledged that the review, which is a major exercise, has not progressed as quickly as planned. We will refocus our prioritisation of this work and will develop a timetable to monitor and report on delivery progress. This would also include reports on progress on actions falling on the unions (TUs).
The Fixed Term Contracts review is a key and first stage of the Review of Employment Terms and collective consultation with unions for the proposed changes commenced on Monday 30 May 2022. Other contracts review, including a review of the position of hourly paid staff and discussions regarding terms of engagement for PGRs who teach, will follow during the Autumn term, with priority sequencing and realistic timescales set, informed by discussion with unions.
The outcome of consultations will be taken to the joint committees for negotiation and/or ratification if necessary. Key to this would be the avoidance of elongation of processes wherever possible.
The University wishes to review the effectiveness and efficiency of the current framework in place for engagement with the unions, including on consultation or negotiation, with a view to enhancing this. The Procedural Agreement between the University and the UCU sets out in detail the respective areas for consultation or negotiation and we reaffirm our commitment to following these and to enhancing dialogue.
The University also continues to actively input into national discussions regarding the core models of employment in HE (through UCEA and more recently with UKRI) and proactive engagement with relevant commitments such as the Concordat for researchers. We believe our Review of Employment Terms to be innovative and potentially helpful to the sector and will share the outcome of our review with UCEA.
The University remains committed to in-sourced services across its core activities.
Gender, race and disability pay gaps
The University commits to report on race & disability pay gaps in 2023. We would ask that the unions support the encouragement of staff to declare the related personal information to progress this work to help ensure that the reporting is as meaningful and accurate as is possible.
The University is committed to reducing pay gaps and continuing to ensure equal pay for work of equal value. It is also committed to increasing the diversity of our workforce through positive action, reflected in the new EDI Strategy for which an action plan is being developed and which will include KPIs and milestones to measure success. It has also made key investments in senior EDI leadership posts. Our aim is that Leeds is a Pathfinder in relation to EDI strategy and its delivery. We will consult with the unions in our development of the action plan and welcome their support in its implementation.
To reiterate, the University is committed to reducing pay gaps and to ensuring equal pay for work of equal value. Specific examples of areas of challenge within universities are the STEM disciplinary and BAME staff pipelines. We are active participants in sector initiatives to help address these and are developing our own as well.
Workload
The University is committed to the development of a health and wellbeing strategic plan (as part of our enabling strategy) which will include consideration of work-related stress and ill health. This will be informed by a staff survey shortly to be launched.
Workload issues across the sector and in the University are acknowledged and we have worked jointly with UCU since May 2021 to review ‘Workload Principles’. The latest revised version (including UCU input) is currently progressing through University committees for approval. Once approved, the Deputy Vice-Chancellor will lead the process of their implementation and review of impacts with trade union involvement and share relevant data as to impact with trade unions.
The University will discuss with the unions how we and they can work collaboratively to review workloads. We will also review the role the SRDS might usefully play in workloads differentiating based on career stage and contract type. The University’s commitments and work associated with the Concordat for research staff is also relevant.
Review of the pay and grading structure
The University commits to fully review the pay & grade spine and to complete this in 2022/23 and will involve the unions in this process. This strategic review will include a benchmarking exercise with peer institutions and best practice. It will also include consideration of grade structures, incremental progression and market pay issues with a view to the University of Leeds staff having competitive (equal or better) reward packages to staff at peer universities and the University being an attractive employer of choice. Our commitments to equality, diversity and inclusion will be embedded in this work.
The University reward strategy is moving towards a more peer and benchmark comparison approach. We will strengthen the role evaluation process for determining role grades. A G10 review is underway with a view to ensuring it is fair and competitive.
The University also plans to fully review its Promotions and Role Evaluation processes. A staged implementation of improvements is already in train and will progress. Trade unions will be involved in the role evaluation process, for which training will be provided in HERA-based role analysis.
The above commitments and their progression in a timely way will require resource and shared commitments by the unions. The University commits to ensuring that people with the required skills, expertise and workload capacity are involved in the work to deliver these commitments.
The University reiterates its intention to review the current framework in place for engagement with the unions with a view to its enhancement and effectiveness in supporting positive and effective relationships.
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
We welcome the Vice Chancellor’s announcement which commits to addressing the issue of job insecurity at the University of Leeds. Acknowledging the damage insecure contracts do to the functioning of the university but, more importantly, to the people who hold them, is an important first step in addressing what is a widespread problem. We fully agree with the VC that insecure contracts undermine fairness at the university. We are glad that casualisation is now part of the conversation after being ignored for so long.
Members may remember that we have been urging the University to move on the issue of casualisation for some years. In January 2019 Leeds UCU formally submitted an anti-casualisation claim, which set out our proposals to end job insecurity at the University of Leeds. The claim included, but was not limited to:
an end to the use of ‘worker’ contracts;
hourly-paid staff to be moved onto fractional contracts;
equal treatment for all staff, regardless of contract type (specifically equal rates of pay, and access to progression and professional development); and
a reduction in the use of fixed-term contracts (FTCs).
Today’s announcement represents movement on one aspect – fixed-term contracts – and as such, we view this as some progress against our existing ongoing claim. The University’s stated aim of “converting the majority of fixed term contracts where colleagues have served more than three years – or possibly even less – to ongoing contracts” essentially amounts to the enforcing of its existing fixed-term contract policy. We hope that this new approach will see the end of the category of “open-ended fixed funding (OEFF) contracts, which UCU have been saying for some time are indistinguishable from fixed term contracts. Above all, we recognise that being made permanent is likely to have a tangible and positive effect on the work and lives of the unacceptably large number of staff who have been on FTCs for more than three years.
We are pleased to note the VC’s stated commitment to consult formally with the trade unions on the issue of fixed-term contracts and secure work, however these are matters for formal negotiation. In the three years since launching our claim, Leeds UCU has repeatedly requested formal talks with university senior management. While issues pertaining to the claim have been discussed at meetings between HR and the unions, senior management have not engaged in formal talks with UCU. Since October when the Fairer Future pledges were made, discussions on FTC policy and wider issues around the use of casualised contracts have been abandoned by HR.
In light of this, consultation is welcome and we look forward to a resumption of talks on addressing job security but, ultimately, given that we have lodged an anti-casualisation claim with the university, the terms of which have been reaffirmed by Leeds UCU as recently as March 2021, this is an issue for negotiation.
While we have some misgivings about the VC making this major announcement in an all-staff email at a time when the UCU is involved in national and local disputes over casualisation, we welcome her stated willingness to work with the unions. We want members to be clear – we are in no doubt that today’s announcements by the University have been prompted by the strength of industrial action taken by our members over the Four Fights.
In terms of our national dispute on casualisation, these plans to address job security laid out by the VC today leave several important factors unaddressed:
The plans we have been presented with show a willingness to act on the issue of casualisation, but we need to see the detail of how this will be implemented and whether it will become lasting policy which minimises job insecurity going forward. Until the substantive details of UEGs plans are clear, UCU will be entering into discussions cautiously;
Fixed-term contracts are only one aspect of casualisation; we need to know how (or whether) other aspects of job insecurity will be addressed; and, relatedly,
While there is much that can be done at the institution level to address casualisation, this is also a national issue. As the address acknowledges, insecure work is “hardwired” into many of the national institutions that are a core part of UK higher education —and, as such, it requires a coordinated national response. We need to know what efforts University of Leeds will make to engage with the national structural causes of casualisation. We believe taking an active and constructive role in negotiating with the UCU’s proposals around Four Fights is the best chance the sector has to do this.
All aspects of our Four Fights dispute intersect with casualisation; casualisation often results in low pay and overwork as a result of unpaid and unrecognised work. Importantly, casualisation is central to our equalities demands where women, staff of colour and staff with disabilities are more likely to be on insecure contracts and remain on them longer. These continue to be issues of serious concern for our members and all university staff and we are still waiting to see serious action on them.
In summary, we welcome the VCs new commitment to addressing casualisation. But this announcement only deals with one part of one of the Four Fights, and we have seen no movement from the VC regarding the erosion in pay that we have witnessed since 2009, equality pay gaps and unsafe workloads. Further to this, we would like to see a commitment to tackling casualisation at a national level which would make these changes more sustainable for the future. For this reason, we encourage all members to vote YES, YES, YES, YES and post their ballots TODAY.
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
This motion was agreed by the branch at a general meeting 8 March 2022
This branch notes:
That the University’s Fairer Future for All campaign was launched a week before our industrial action ballot opened in October 2021;
That the University regularly cites this campaign in response to student, staff and press enquiries about what they are doing to resolve our disputes;
That the recognised campus trade unions have not been involved in any aspect of the Fairer Future for all campaign and have been given no information about timescales, targets and outcomes.
This branch believes:
That what is needed to resolve our disputes is action by senior management at UK level and locally, not a campaign;
That any action to improve staff working conditions needs to be fully consulted or negotiated with the recognised trade unions in accordance with our recognition agreement with the University
This branch resolves:
To actively reject the idea that A Fairer Future For All represents movement towards the outcomes required to resolve our disputes with the University
To continue to push the University to negotiate with us an agreement to end casualisation, end unsafe workloads and fix the gender, race and disability pay gaps
To continue to pressure the University to lead resolution of our disputes at a UK wide level
To insist that our recognition agreement is respected
Proposed by Chloe Wallace, moved by Chloe Wallace, seconded by Jennifer Fletcher, motion carried.
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
Full transcript
Vice Chancellor Simone Buitendijk: We’re going into 10 days of strike action and yeah I must say I’m a bit sad about it.
Leeds UCU: Of course, nobody is happy to have to participate in industrial action. Colleagues much prefer to be teaching, supporting and advising students. But when employers will not enter into meaningful negotiations with employee representatives on issues that have needed addressing for years, and when negotiating opportunity after opportunity is thrown away by employers, staff are left with industrial action as their only option.
VC: That an important minority of our committed staff have decided to take such dramatic action
UCU: The law requires that over 50% of trade union members must vote for any result to mandate industrial action. This is a greater test than required, for example, electing a police commissioner (typically, a 35% turnout). At Leeds, 75.2% of voting members supported strike action, and 85.5% supported ‘action short of a strike’.
VC: I’m sad because students have already endured so much disruption and this is going to impact on their learning their education their experience
UCU: Many students have been impacted by Covid, and UCU constituency staff were often their first port of call for support and assistance. The University has been keen to communicate that their education was not disrupted during this period. This was again down to the resilience and dedication of those colleagues, working in difficult circumstances, adapting to new modes of delivery, often putting their work ahead of their families to keep classes running.
VC: And I don’t think industrial action and strike action is the solution to the problems that clearly need fixing. The University of Leeds is part of UUK and there’s not much that I can do by myself because that is a national dispute
UCU: Our VC sits at the tables of both the UUK and the Russell Group. She represents Leeds there, an institution with one of the highest number of USS members in the UK. At those tables, it is reasonable to believe that she contributes meaningfully to decisions about negotiations, communications and decisions. This is not powerlessness, it is responsibility.
However, if we take what is said here at face value, it seems to indicate that UUK members have no power over the UUK, that it is out of control, and does not listen to its members, not even those such as Leeds with the highest density of USS members.
VC: And I try to play as strong a role as possible together with my other colleagues on the leadership team because I think we all want a pension scheme that keeps its value that’s sustainable and I think the proposal that’s on the table now the UUK proposal is the best for the moment.
UCU: The UUK proposal requires the youngest members of staff (mostly) to pay off a debt that no longer exists. They have to pay that with their future income in retirement, seeing a third or more lopped off its value. The younger a member is in the scheme, the more money they will lose. This impacts on women worse than men, due to the 18.5% gender pay gap that has been acknowledged at Leeds. With such unfairness baked in, the UUK proposal is a long way from the best available.
The UCU offered a compromise proposal on 26 January, as a means for us all to avoid the strike. The VC did not acknowledge that proposal until the afternoon of 11 February, less than a working day before the strike was to begin.
Does the VC want to negotiate, as she claims, or does she want to keep supporting the UUK intergenerational unfairness at the UUK table?
VC: So at the University of Leeds we realise that we need to change the way we deal with contracts with employment that there’s a lot that needs changing so we’ve developed a campaign that we call Fairer Future For All and one of the focal points is having far fewer short-term contracts so we’re going to be working towards more open-ended contracts and we’ve already started.
UCU: UCU put in a formal claim to challenge the University’s use of casualised contracts three years ago. The University still refuses to negotiate on it.
Productive work on contracts with the unions that was ongoing has ground to a halt since the Fairer Future for All campaign was launched. If further work is ongoing, the recognised trade unions have not been informed, let alone involved. In the meantime, staff on fixed term contracts are still losing their jobs, sometimes after many years of service, and Postgraduate Research Students who teach have no contracts and still get no paid sick leave.
VC: We will be looking at workload and workload models to make sure we can keep the workload under control.
UCU: Joint work is ongoing to produce some high level principles to govern workload management. Whether this will be complete by the end of March, as the Vice Chancellor states in her email, depends on whether it can be agreed. Whatever other work is ongoing is being done without consulting, or involving, the recognised trade unions.
In the meantime, staff are worked to breaking point and more is asked of us every year. When the University was hit by a double whammy of ongoing COVID-19 issues and massive over-recruitment in some areas, senior managers denied that there was a crisis and refused to take any meaningful steps to reduce staff workload in the immediate term.
VC: So a lot of what the unions are after is something that’s very much on my radar.
UCU: And what about the national picture? The University states that one of our values is collaboration – why can our senior management not collaborate with the management teams of other university to commit to UK-wide agreements to improve our whole sector, not just Leeds?
VC: I would like to say both to staff and maybe even more so to students who are apprehensive who are worried about the disruption that we do have quite a bit of experience, maybe I should say unfortunately, but we do, with past rounds of industrial action so we’re on top of this and we’ll do our utmost to ensure that students have the education that’s as uninterrupted as possible we’re going to work really closely with heads of school so they’re going to make sure that they monitor where teaching doesn’t take place they’re going to ensure that it gets picked up again after strike action is over.
UCU: We very much hope that this is not a threat to follow other Universities and deduct pay for action short of a strike (in addition to the pay docked for striking). For Leeds University to engage in this bullying behaviour would be divisive and confrontational, and would harm our cohesion, possibly irreparably.
VC: They’ll mitigate, they’ll work with the teachers and the staff in their schools to come up with solutions that are bespoke from different student cohorts. We have an incredibly resilient community, we’ve done an amazing job getting us through the pandemic, really keeping the show on the road. I think our community is stronger than it’s ever been, so I know we’ll pull through this and we’ll do it together.
UCU: We certainly hope so. We will pull through this when our senior management take responsibility for negotiating seriously to protect our pensions and pay and to create concrete improvements in our working conditions. They need to listen and act on the concerns raised by staff through their trade unions. Staff have done an amazing job, at considerable expense to ourselves, and we deserve better.
No mention of equalities issues in this video? The Equal Pay Act was passed in 1970 and came into force in 1975. It was superseded by the Equality Act 2010.
In 2022, women are paid 18.5% less than men at the University of Leeds. That means women earn 86p for every £1 that men earn when comparing median hourly pay.
Additionally, there is a national race pay gap of 17.1% and a disability pay gap of 9%. Leeds have not published their local figures. We have been asking for years for this to be addressed, and promises of a fairer future keep deferring the issue instead of actively addressing it in the present.
Still on equalities. Last year, for the first time in its history, the University dismissed a member of staff for not having enough research outputs. This British Asian member of staff demonstrably had the same or more research outputs than some of their white colleagues at their grade and even above.
Industrial action only happens after months and years of discussions and negotiation breaking down. It is always only a last resort.
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
This motion was agreed by the branch at an extra-ordinary general meeting 14 January 2022
This branch notes that:
Our branch has a strong mandate for industrial action relating to the USS dispute and the ‘Four Fights’
we had an excellent response from members to the strike action prior to the Christmas holiday.
other UCU branches who have been in local dispute have been taking sustained strike action
we have, as yet, little information from HQ as to the next stage of the industrial dispute
This branch believes that:
it is only through sustained strike action that the employers will be forced to concede to UCU’s demands.
we need to ensure maximum involvement of our members in visible activity during the strike period, both in person and online
this involves making the sustained action sustainable, and be realistic about members’ in-person participation at a time of online working and the pandemic , hence diversifying our forms of action during a long strike
escalation including marking boycott should be considered if the employer does not come back to the negotiating table
This branch resolves that:
we prepare for the possibility of sustained strike action (2-4 weeks) followed by action short of strike
we hold regular organising meetings to review tactics around timing and mixing of picketing, rallies and teach outs.
we share educational material from the UCU Strike Schools including how to engage with the public and co-workers during pickets
Proposed by G. Alberti, J. Holgate, D. Kascelan, moved by Gabriella Alberti, seconded by Alan Roe, the motion was amended during the debate to the text above, the motion was carried as amended.
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
You will have seen in an email from UCU general secretary Jo Grady this week that further decisions as to the progression and escalation of our industrial action will be taken in a meeting of UCU’s higher education committee (HEC) in the week beginning 17 January, and that there will be a branch delegate meeting on 18 January for branches to feed in views and positions. As a result, I am calling an extraordinary general meeting for 1pm on Friday 14 January, for the purpose of discussing our feedback and views on the progression of our industrial action.
If you wish to propose a motion to that meeting please send it to ucu@leeds.ac.uk by 12 noon on Thursday 6 January – that will ensure that we can circulate any motions to members in good time to allow for people to propose amendments. As before, I will only accept late motions if they relate to developments subsequent to the motion deadline (for example, proposals made by HQ after that date for consideration by branches). Link to follow.
This post is based on an email to members from branch president Chloe Wallace on 10 December 2021
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
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
UCU University of Leeds BranchPosted on by Alan Smith
– 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.
