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.

Minutes of extraordinary general meeting 17 June 2021

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Extraordinary general meeting 
1pm – 2pm, Thursday 17 June 2021 
Video meeting on Zoom 

Minutes 

Agreed to omnibus debate on Israel/Palestine motions. 

Agreed to limit movers of motions to 3 minutes and other contributions to 2 minutes. 

Motion 1 

Leeds University UCU branch offers its solidarity with the Palestinian people in their struggle to defend their homes and lives. The branch supports events and initiatives in solidarity with the people of Palestine. 

Proposed by Megan Povey. Moved by Megan Povey. Seconded by Robina Mir. The motion was carried. 

Motion 2 

The branch notes: 

  1. That as national policy, ‘UCU supports the Friends of Bir Zeit University and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’ (https://ucu.org.uk/internationalsolidarity#ispal). 
  1. That violence in Israel-Palestine has complex origins, prominently including European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century. 
  1. That support for Palestinian rights has, regrettably, at times overlapped with anti-Semitism. 
  1. That we have not had an extensive local discussion of this policy, or of how the local branch might best implement it, at a general meeting in some time, and that careful and open discussion of our policies is useful to advancing UCU’s causes. 

The branch believes: 

  1. That UCU’s national policy is appropriate in view of
    1. the deprivation of people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories of their human rights
    2. the fact that the Israeli state currently exerts far greater power over these polities than the Palestinian Territories do over the Israeli state 
    3. the need for the implementation of Palestinian human rights to make peace, justice, and reconciliation achievable in the region
  2. That we must communicate our solidarity with Palestine in ways that neither court anti-Semitism in intent nor in how it our statements are likely to be interpreted by good-faith readers, as part of our general commitment to anti-racism.
  3. That one strategy of people who oppose Palestinian human rights has been to portray solidarity for Palestine and/or criticism of the Israeli state as generally anti-Semitic; that this strategy has proved effective in dampening explicit solidarity with Palestine; and that to be politically effective, our expressions of support for Palestine must avert this strategy. 

The branch moves: 

To reiterate its solidarity with Palestinian people at the present time with the following statement, which stands as an example of appropriately subtle expression of our views. 

We stand in solidarity with Palestinian people facing oppression both within and outside Palestine. 
We express our distress at the recent violence in both Gaza and Israel, and especially express our sympathies to all those of our colleagues and students who have been affected by it. We recognise the complex origins of this violence and that these prominently include European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century. 
We also recognise the disparities of power in the present situation, however, and stand in solidarity with Palestinians facing both slow and imminent violence by the Israeli state, which is both curtailing the rights of its Palestinian citizens and systematically depriving people in Palestine of their human rights through illegal actions. Without implementation of Palestinian human rights, the tragic and shameful cycle of violence, loss of life and limb, and impact to livelihoods now and in the future will continue, making peace, justice and reconciliation unachievable in the region. 

Proposed by Alaric Hall. Moved by Alaric Hall, seconded by Helen Finch. 

Proposed amendments to motion 2 

The following nine amendments proposed by James Dickins. 

Amendment 1 

“1. That as national policy, ‘UCU supports the Friends of Bir Zeit University and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’ (https://ucu.org.uk/internationalsolidarity#ispal).” 

Proposed amendment. Add: “and also supports Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS): https://bdsmovement.net/news/ucu-passes-important-bds-resolution”. 

Amendment 2 

“2. That violence in Israel-Palestine has complex origins, prominently including European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century.” 

Proposed amendment. Remove: “prominently including European genocide of Jewish people [and]”, and replace with: “It is partly to be seen against the backdrop of European genocide of Jewish people”. 

Amendment 3 

“3. That support for Palestinian rights has, regrettably, at times overlapped with anti-Semitism.” 

Proposed amendment: remove all, and replace with: “That support for Palestinian rights is not to be confused with antisemitism, and that Palestine Solidarity Campaign and other pro-Palestine groups are explicit that they oppose antisemitism alongside all other forms of racism”. 

Amendment 4 

“4. That we have not had an extensive local discussion of this policy, or of how the local branch might best implement it, at a general meeting in some time, and that careful and open discussion of our policies is useful to advancing UCU’s causes.” 

Proposed amendment. Remove all. 

Amendment 5 

“b) the fact that the Israeli state currently exerts far greater power over these polities than the Palestinian Territories do over the Israeli state” 

Remove all and replace with: 

“The fact that the Israeli state has almost total control over the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories, imposing what both Human Rights Watch and Israel’s largest human rights organisation, B’Tselem have described as an ‘apartheid regime’.” 

Amendment 6 

“3. That one strategy of people who oppose Palestinian human rights has been to portray solidarity for Palestine and/or criticism of the Israeli state as generally anti-Semitic; that this strategy has proved effective in dampening explicit solidarity with Palestine; and that to be politically effective, our expressions of support for Palestine must avert this strategy.” 

Proposed amendment. Remove “avert” and replace with “expose and explicitly challenge”. 

Amendment 7 

“To reiterate its solidarity with Palestinian people at the present time with the following statement, which stands as an example of appropriately subtle expression of our views.” 

Proposed amendment number as “1” and remove “appropriately subtle”. 

Amendment 8 

“We recognise the complex origins of this violence and that these prominently include European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century.” 

Proposed amendment. Remove “that these prominently include European genocide of Jewish people”, and replace with: “and that it is partly to be seen against the backdrop of European genocide of Jewish people”. 

Amendment 9 

“making peace, justice and reconciliation unachievable in the region.” 

Add additional point at the end of the motion: “2. To implement at the University of Leeds UCU national policy in support of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, and in line with other universities such as Sheffield University and Sheffield Hallam University, to seek to establish a joint University-UCU anti-apartheid committee to work together to progress the disinvestment talks with management.” 

All nine amendments were moved by James Dickins, seconded by Robina Mir. All nine amendments were carried, so the substantive motion is now: 

Motion 2 (as amended) 

The branch notes: 

  1. That as national policy, ‘UCU supports the Friends of Bir Zeit University and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign’ (https://ucu.org.uk/internationalsolidarity#ispal) and also supports Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS): https://bdsmovement.net/news/ucu-passes-important-bds-resolution 
  1. That violence in Israel-Palestine has complex origins. It is partly to be seen against the backdrop of European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century. 
  1. That support for Palestinian rights is not to be confused with antisemitism, and that Palestine Solidarity Campaign and other pro-Palestine groups are explicit that they oppose antisemitism alongside all other forms of racism. 

The branch believes: 

  1. That UCU’s national policy is appropriate in view of 
    1. the deprivation of people in the Occupied Palestinian Territories of their human rights 
    2. The fact that the Israeli state has almost total control over the Palestinians of the Occupied Territories, imposing what both Human Rights Watch and Israel’s largest human rights organisation, B’Tselem have described as an ‘apartheid regime’ 
    3. the need for the implementation of Palestinian human rights to make peace, justice, and reconciliation achievable in the region 
  2. That we must communicate our solidarity with Palestine in ways that neither court anti-Semitism in intent nor in how it our statements are likely to be interpreted by good-faith readers, as part of our general commitment to anti-racism. 
  3. That one strategy of people who oppose Palestinian human rights has been to portray solidarity for Palestine and/or criticism of the Israeli state as generally anti-Semitic; that this strategy has proved effective in dampening explicit solidarity with Palestine; and that to be politically effective, our expressions of support for Palestine must expose and explicitly challenge this strategy. 

The branch moves: 

  1. To reiterate its solidarity with Palestinian people at the present time with the following statement, which stands as an example of expression of our views. 

We stand in solidarity with Palestinian people facing oppression both within and outside Palestine. 

We express our distress at the recent violence in both Gaza and Israel, and especially express our sympathies to all those of our colleagues and students who have been affected by it. We recognise the complex origins of this violence and that it is partly to be seen against the backdrop of European genocide of Jewish people and European colonial policies of the twentieth century. 

We also recognise the disparities of power in the present situation, however, and stand in solidarity with Palestinians facing both slow and imminent violence by the Israeli state, which is both curtailing the rights of its Palestinian citizens and systematically depriving people in Palestine of their human rights through illegal actions. Without implementation of Palestinian human rights, the tragic and shameful cycle of violence, loss of life and limb, and impact to livelihoods now and in the future will continue, making peace, justice and reconciliation unachievable in the region. 

  1. To implement at the University of Leeds UCU national policy in support of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, and in line with other universities such as Sheffield University and Sheffield Hallam University, to seek to establish a joint University-UCU anti-apartheid committee to work together to progress the disinvestment talks with management. 

The motion was carried. 

Motion 3 

Leeds UCU notes: 

  1. Israel’s largest and most influential Human Rights group B’Tselem and Human Rights Watch have both recently published reports defining Israel as an apartheid regime. 
  1. University of Leeds has investments in HSBC, Booking.com and Barclay’s in addition to institutional links with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and IDC Herzliya. 
  1. UCU policy opposes such investments and links with Israel. 
  1. The Leeds University Palestine Solidarity Group has authored an open letter to the VC calling for divestment (http://newaoc.com/leedsu). The letter has got so far more than 180 signatures from staff members, students, alumni and 10 LUU student societies. 
  1. The Leeds UCU Committee has signed the above Open Letter. 

Leeds UCU believes: 

  1. The University of Leeds is complicit in the oppression of the Palestinian people and the continuation of Israeli apartheid by investing in HSBC, Booking.com and Barclay’s in addition to maintaining institutional links with the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and IDC Herzliya. 
  1. The University should release a statement in support of its Palestinian students and staff members. 
  1. Whilst the University must protect all staff and students against racism including Islamophobia and antisemitism, it should also protect staff and students from unfounded accusations of antisemitism for speaking up for Palestinian human rights. 

Leeds UCU resolves to: 

  1. Sign the Open Letter to the VC. 
  1. Release a public statement in solidarity with the Palestinians and in support of the Open Letter and its demands. 

Proposed by Rasha Soliman, moved by Rasha Soliman, seconded by Lesley McGorrigan. The motion was carried. 

Motion 4 – Donation to branches striking over redundancies 

This branch agrees to: 

• donate £400 to the Liverpool UCU strike fund 

• donate £400 to the Leicester UCU strike fund 

Proposed by the committee, moved by Vicky Blake, seconded by Kara Hazelgrave. The motion was carried. 

Black History Month 2021 at Leeds

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Leeds UCU committee are hugely supportive of the Black History Month programme organised by Leeds 11, the university staff network for Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Staff, together with partners and friends. See the full programme here: https://equality.leeds.ac.uk/events/black-history-month-bhm-2021/

We’d recommend you attend some of these events, to learn about, acknowledge and celebrate Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic cultures. We thank the organisers for so much time and energy they put into arranging this programme.  The theme for Black History Month this year is ‘Proud To Be’, which invites Black and Brown people of all ages to share what they are proud to be.  Leeds 11 say “We also want to highlight the value and importance of intersectionality and we ask staff and students to widen their horizons and understand the unique experiences and stories of people who hold multiple characteristics. As well as this, we hope to celebrate a truly amazing Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic community who have decided to call the University of Leeds their home.”

UCU nationally is also hosting an online event “Tackling the legacy of oppression” on Wednesday 20th October, 6.30pm – 8.00pm with a range of Black educationalists, discussing issues such as student attainment and the wage gap (details in UCU link below). You can register at https://ucu.wufoo.com/forms/black-history-month-event/. 

For more information:

Ben Plumpton & Megan Povey, joint Equality Officers

Trans issues update

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

Members will remember the UCU branch committee supported the staff LGBTQ+ network and student LGBTQ+ society in a letter to the Vice Chancellor raising serious concerns about transphobia at the university, and asking that effective action (including on IT systems) should be taken to protect trans and non-binary staff and students from harm. We were also disturbed by transphobic comments in the recent Big Leeds Conversation, which were not removed by the moderators, unlike a racist post. The letter asked for actions to be taken, including a meeting with the VC. The response in no way covered everything that was raised, and focused more on general commitments to equality and inclusion (which are of course welcome but action is needed as well as words!)

Some limited progress is being made as a result of this:

  1. A working group, which includes trans staff and students and trade union reps, is developing trans guidance for staff, students and managers. This will sit alongside the trans equality policy statement at https://equality.leeds.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/64/2021/05/Trans-equality-policy-statement-May-2021.docx (which is the policy originally agreed in 2017 – the retrograde replacement policy that was being proposed has been shelved). If you would like to help give feedback on the guidance as it is drafted, please contact the branch equality officers Ben Plumpton or Megan Povey.
  2. A project in IT is working on short term fixes for IT systems to ensure that changes to staff and student titles, names and genders are dealt with properly, and that confidentiality about individuals’ trans status is maintained. This is an interim measure until new corporate systems are introduced, which will take several years.
  3. It has been confirmed that Gender Recognition Certificates are not required from trans staff and students.  They have wrongly been requested previously.

The branch Equality Officers will continue to work with the staff LGBTQ+ network and student LGBTQ+ society to challenge transphobic culture and to work towards making the university a safe and welcoming space for trans and non-binary people.  There is much to be done! And of course, if any individual trans or non-binary member is having problems with discrimination or harassment at work, please contact the branch via ucu@leeds.ac.uk to ask for casework support.

We are also compiling a document of anonymisd stories about the difficulties that trans and non-binary staff at this university have experienced. The idea of this is to help other members and managers to understand why this is so important.  If you are willing to provide your own story, please fill in this form. Contributions will be moderated before appearing in the document to avoid hostile and distressing posts. Please be careful in the wording of your contribution to avoid anything that might identify yourself or other individuals.

If you are cis-gendered (the term for non-trans people) there are things you can do as an individual to be a trans ally. We’d encourage you to:

  1. Find out about how to support trans and non-binary colleagues and students. A good place to start is watching this video of a recent workshop at the university on “Creating an inclusive environment for trans students and staff’ (you will need to log in with your university account, and the video is only available until 5th November as requested by the speaker).
  2. Don’t make assumptions about a person’s gender. Ensure you use the pronouns a person prefers – ask them if you don’t know, or use their name.
  3. Add your pronouns to your email signature, Twitter account etc to help trans and non-binary colleagues feel more welcome and recognised. This shouldn’t be something that’s required, because for example some trans colleagues might not feel comfortable doing so, but it is a small demonstration of support and solidarity.
  4. Check out UCU’s commitment to trans inclusion https://ucu.org.uk/article/10177/Statement-reaffirming-UCUs-commitment-trans-inclusion
  5. Challenge transphobic comments – become an active bystander. For advice on this (which is of course equally relevant to challenging racism etc) see for example https://equality.leeds.ac.uk/support-and-resources/becoming-an-active-bystander/

Ben Plumpton & Megan Povey, joint Equality Officers

USS and Four Fights disputes (and a bit on facecoverings)

UCU University of Leeds Branch Posted on by

UCU is balloting over strike action on USS pensions and on pay, casualisation, workloads and equality (‘four fights’). Branch president Chloe Wallace is asking members to check your account details ready for a postal ballot at home, and to prepare to vote. Chloe’s email to members, copied below, also mentions initial responses the university’s improved guidance on face coverings.

Dear members 

I hope everyone is staying safe and well. This is an email primarily about the announcement received a couple of days ago about national ballots on the Four Fights and Pensions. I want to try briefly to pre-empt some of your questions and say something about what we will be doing here at Leeds. I will, however, add a paragraph at the end about the University position on face coverings as I have had a number of emails on that. That will make this a long email – I’d be grateful, however, if you could take the time to read it as it may help clarify what is going on. 

The Union nationally has now established trade disputes with all relevant HE employers in the UK, including, of course, the University of Leeds. This is following decisions taken at a Special Higher Education Sector Conference, attended by branch delegates from across the country.  You can find a copy of the letter sent to Universities on USS here  and on the Four Fights here  

I strongly recommend having a look at those letters, because they set out in clear terms what UCU’s demands are. I know that understanding the specificity of what we are seeking is important to you and that, perhaps particularly in relation to the pensions dispute, this can seem unclear. However, it is clearly spelt out in these letters what the employers need to do to resolve these disputes and avoid the massive disruption of industrial action. If you would like more detail on the claims in the Four Fights dispute, on workload, casualization, equality and pay, you can find that it in the formal claim document here

Our next step is to ballot for industrial action. The ballot will open on 18th October and run for just over 2 weeks. Under the 2016 Trade Union Act – a piece of Tory legislation explicitly designed to weaken trade unions by limiting our industrial power – a number of legal restrictions exist on this ballot. It must be conducted by post, not online; to be valid, 50% or more of eligible members must vote; and 50% of those voting must vote Yes to proposed action. You will be asked to vote separately on each dispute (USS, and Four Fights) and to vote on willingness to strike and to take action short of a strike. The ballot paper will need to state the range of actions short of a strike which may be proposed (e.g. marking boycott, work to contract, refusal to do voluntary work) but will not specify precisely which ones will be used and when, and will not specify strike days or how many days of action will initially be called. The decision as to when and for how long we strike and what action short of a strike we take will be taken after the ballot results are known by the Unions national Higher Education Committee. Once the ballot closes, 2 weeks notice of industrial action needs to be given to employers – this means that the earliest we can take action is the latter half of November. The ballot mandate remains in place for 6 months. 

These rules are tough, but UCU has defied them time and time again, both for national and local disputes. Many branches have achieved a successful ballot outcome over the last 18 months, so remote or hybrid working is not an obstacle – it just means we have to do things a bit differently. Leeds University is one of the strongest, most engaged and active branches in the country and I have no doubt we can do it. But every vote counts- there are numerous examples of branches missing the turnout threshold by single figures of votes. So I am asking all members to take the following actions now: 

1. Check your details on MyUCU and in particular ensure your postal address is right. We have been recommending for a while that you make sure your recorded postal address is your home address and we believe most of you have done this but double check anyway, particularly if you have recently moved home.

2. Commit to voting now. We are a democratic trade union and industrial action ballots are a key expression of that. Not voting prevents the union from acting and effectively silences the voices of those who do vote. A strong turnout helps us both nationally and locally – officers and negotiators need your power behind us. 

3. Inform yourself to decide how to vote. There will be a lot of emails, both nationally and locally, and I know all too well how hard that is to manage, but informed choice is at the heart of democracy. There will be national events going on. At Leeds we will be holding non-motion focused meetings on the different issues in the dispute for you to hear what the issues are, ask questions, and learn how industrial action will help us win. There will also be local meetings called by local reps, to allow you to meet other members in your area and build solidarity.  

Above all, please prepare to fight. No-one wants this, and it remains open to our employers across the UK to take the very simple steps needed to stop this from happening.  But if they won’t, we need to fight to win, to protect our working conditions, pay and pensions, to stamp out casualization and inequality, and to save our sector, and the health and wellbeing of all within it. Vote, and vote yes.  

 Face coverings 

As promised, due to the number of emails I have had about the new university position on face coverings, a few responses. What I am hearing is that it is better but not good enough and I agree. A number of people have asked about the wording that “No-one will be denied access to a teaching event for not wearing a face covering” This reflects what is stated in the latest government guidance for England, which is frankly incoherent. However, a number of universities have gone further and mandated facecoverings, including in teaching spaces, and we do not see why Leeds cannot do the same. If you are wondering what is happening around the country, a member at Sussex UCU, Andrew Chitty, is keeping a running account here   We are awaiting further clarity in the form of FAQs about, for example, what to do if a student refuses. And we note that all of this change is  happening far too late.  We will be discussing next steps at our General Meeting on 7th October – please come along and make your voice heard.  

In solidarity

Dr Chloe Wallace

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

President, Leeds University UCU

@chloew1970