↓
 

Late motion: amendment to UCU Congress motion SFC26 Increase legal support to defend local trade union rights 

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Add new Congress believes b) “No employer should consider itself justified for making duplicate and/or disproportionate pay deductions for work withheld due to industrial action” 

In resolves ii, after “strike action”, add  

“and any pay deductions for industrial action (including ASOS) that are disproportionate to the amount/hours of work withheld.” 

Add new resolves iii: UCU should name and shame any employer engaging in such punitive tactics. 

(Motion as amended would read:) 

SFC26 Increase legal support to defend local trade union rights  

University of Sheffield 

Congress notes that 

  1. Our sectors face unprecedented attacks on the rights of trade unionists from employers, using novel tactics such as the ‘double deductions’ recently imposed at the University of Sheffield.    
  1. That in common-law countries, employment law can be advanced through litigation in courts and tribunals.    
  1. Litigation and legal advice are often beyond the financial reach of local branches.  

Congress believes 

  1. UCU must strategically balance the need to avoid unsustainable legal costs against local branches’ need for centralised legal support.  
  1. “No employer should consider itself justified for making duplicate and/or disproportionate pay deductions for work withheld due to industrial action. 

Congress resolves that 

  1. NEC should review UCU legal’s level of funding and their approach to taking legal action on behalf of branches, to increase the ability of local branches to challenge novel forms of trade union victimisation.    
  1. UCU should lobby for ‘double deductions’ to be proscribed as a form of detriment for participating in strike action and any pay deductions for industrial action (including ASOS) that are disproportionate to the amount/hours of work withheld under the Employment Rights Act 2025. 
  1. UCU should name and shame any employer engaging in such punitive tactics. 

Proposed by Vicky Blake. Moved by Jenny Rivas Perez, seconded by Sandy James from the chair. The motion was carried at the ordinary general meeting 30 April 2026.

This page was last updated on 15 September 2026

Comments are closed.

↑