People flock to UCU blog for information

Students support UCU

Yesterday saw the second highest volume of people to come to the blog in one day (966 by midnight). The only other day to receive any higher volume was Thursday 19 November, the day of the protest outside the Ziff. The blog on the protest, coupled with the blog from the day before on the VCEG Rudding Park trip, gave that day a serious readership across campus and beyond. We can only read yesterday’s spike as having been produced by a campus thirsty for information following the revelation that UCU was raising serious concerns regarding the VCs explanation for the halting of the ACAS talks, coupled with the impressive collection of photos of students declaring support for any strike action (see published stats for 8 January, below, snapshot taken at 6pm).

Yesterday's spike, growing at 6pm

Confidence vote in UCU by both members and non-members

The recent election for seats on Senate was a great success for UCU. Members of staff in the University had sixteen nominated candidates to choose from, of which six were UCU committee members. Staff were able to vote for seven members to represent them at Senate. They elected all six members of UCU committee, and the seventh candidate who also mentioned the UCU in his supporting statement. The numbers of people voting is higher than in any previous year, with individual UCU candidates receiving over 200 votes, for example.

Clearly, following last week’s ballot result, this is another strong mandate for the UCU, and for its alternative vision of how this University deserves to be run.

See our previous blog to read the statements made by the candidates – statements that elicited this high vote count from both UCU members and non-members.

What we asked for

In our blog on Friday (go here to read it again) we pointed out the four substantive areas we sought progress on from the ACAS talks. Below are the fourteen points that were presented to the University’s management at talks on Thursday 4 February. These were considered for five minutes by the University management before being rejected. This ‘impasse’ was then represented to all staff that evening in a letter from the VC using words that appeared nowhere in these fourteen points.

Below is a copy of the position we put to the university at ACAS. It is both clear and reasonable and clearly does not ask, as has since been suggested, for a guarantee that they will never ever make a compulsory redundancy. It does propose that we work together to avoid them.

Proposal to University side at Acas talks on 4^th February 2010

Without prejudice, under the heading of the Acas talks

The following require immediate resolution.

1. Faculty of Biological Sciences (FBS) Job Descriptions (JDs) and Job Matching process is unacceptable.

2. UCU are not convinced that the FBS academic plan is sound or achievable as written.

3. UCU are not convinced that the JDs as presented are acceptable to our members in FBS and should not stand. The current JDs should not be used.

4. UCU are not convinced that the teaching needs within the faculty can be achieved with the current plan.

5. Student:Staff Ratio (SSR) within the FBS plan is unacceptably high, being above that of the highest average SSR in any Russell Group University.

6. UCU does not accept compulsory redundancies on the basis of the above and in particular the loss of 20.3 equivalent Full Time Equivalent (FTE) equivalents.

7. We still do not have clarity about the financial plan which is used to justify the job cuts required by the FBS plan.

8. In order for agreement to be reached, (a) we need progress on points 1 to 7 and (b) the university  needs to provide interim funding arrangements to finance e.g. Increase the number of roles within FBS, in particular to address teaching needs; redeploy within the Faculty or University those displaced staff who have genuinely been unable to secure a role through a fair, equitable and transparent process, also offer a further Enhanced MIS/PRT (Mobility Incentive/Premature Retirement) scheme up to the maximum allowable under USS.

The following require resolution this term

9. Establishment of the Employment Security Review Group (ESRG) including its terms of reference and dispute resolution procedure and organisational change policy (as it applies to the university and Faculties, as opposed to Schools and smaller units.)

10.  A review of all current reviews to be carried out under the auspices of ESRG

11. ESRG to ensure that all statutory obligations of the university under employment law are consistent with proposals to be made to senate and council (Equality Impact Assessment, Consultation, mitigation of redundancy, Voluntary Severance Scheme)

12 All outcomes of the Economies Exercise to go to ESRG, prior to Senate and then Council.

13. Agreement on communications – to agree a strategy on joint communications throughout the university.

14. A modus operandi on issues of governance, collegiality and academic freedom.

If they say something often enough, will people believe it?

At three minutes past one today, when the University knew a major UCU meeting was taking place, all members of staff received an email stating the reason for the break down of ACAS talks last week:

“The sticking point was a demand from UCU that the University management rule out any possibility of compulsory redundancy of any academic within the Faculty of Biological Sciences (FBS).”

The UCU reps in ACAS never made this demand, but perhaps the University management hopes that if they say it often enough, people will believe it. Members, other staff and students deserve better. UCU are prepared to continue talking. Are the University?

Leeds Students tell UCU what they think

Do you want to add your image to this collection? Send a picture, holding any appropriate text, to leedsucu@me.com

Message from Malcolm Povey

Following the collapse of Acas talks yesterday (4/2/2010) the Vice Chancellor has written to all staff. The University has also placed a statement on CampusWeb explaining that the talks have collapsed because of the following:

“There does not appear to be any prospect of further talks while the UCU insists that the University give a guarantee that there will never be any compulsory redundancies in the Faculty of Biological Sciences.”

UCU wants to make it absolutely clear that we have made no such demand, and that the University has walked out of the Acas talks, unilaterally declaring an impasse.

Although members have voted overwhelmingly for industrial action, we have made clear to the Employer that there remain three weeks for further discussions under Acas before the law dictates that we take action on the ballot result. We believe that the Vice-Chancellor owes it to his staff, and especially to his students, to engage responsibly with the Acas process. UCU for its part, remains willing to attempt to find a negotiated settlement.

UCU is making here a public offer to the Vice-Chancellor to re-open talks in Acas with immediate effect.

So that members can be in no doubt of the facts, here is a brief summary of how the Acas talks proceeded.

The University side asked UCU to make clear what would be required to settle the dispute. The issues had previously been distilled down to 4 headings

1. The establishment of an ‘Employment Security Review Group’ (ESRG) aimed at avoiding compulsory redundancies.
2. A review of the current restructuring process. How it might better apply to Faculty or University level reorganization, as opposed to smaller School and Unit level organizational change.
3. Faculty of Biological Sciences (FBS). UCU declared a formal dispute on 9th November and since then the University has pressed ahead with restructuring, regardless of concerns raised by UCU on behalf of our members.
4. An affirmation, through agreed communications, that the published Code of Practice on Corporate Governance will be followed in future.  This protects academic freedom and expects collegial processes to be followed. It also requires personal interest to be separated from formal decision making.

On points 1,2 and 4, we believe there to be common ground.

UCU was asked to put its concerns into writing. Briefly, we put a list of 14 points together for discussion some for immediate resolution, others for longer term working.

Just a few minutes later, the University side declared an impasse without any substantive discussion of any of the points, and without even establishing the areas of common ground. These points as far as UCU is concerned remain on the table.

Nowhere in our 14-point statement does UCU demand, as stated by the Vice-Chancellor in his letter to all staff ‘a guarantee that there would be no compulsory redundancies, ever, in the faculty of biological sciences.’ The UCU simply does not recognize this form of words.

We can only draw the conclusion that this fundamental misrepresentation is to justify the Vice-Chancellor’s decision to opt for conflict rather than dialogue at this point in time.

The University still has legal obligations to consult UCU in a meaningful way regarding the proposed redundancies in FBS, yet it is difficult to see how it proposes now to carry out this consultation. It also has a duty under its own Statutes to set up fair and just processes when reorganizing staff and their academic activities.

The Vice-Chancellor has a very long way to go to re-establish any kind of support within the academic community. UCU does not accept the Vice-Chancellor’s statement that there is sometimes tension between employment law and the good governance of a collegial institution. He is implying that UCU is an obstacle. Employment law lays down minimum standards for the country as a whole, academic freedom requires universities to operate to higher standards.

Very sadly, if things are left the way they are UCU will have no choice but to trigger concerted industrial action. Our aim is to resolve not escalate the dispute, but it takes two to tango.

Malcolm Povey

Friday, 05 February 2010

Update: Times Higher Education story

Will industrial action make the problem go away?

The University issued a statement yesterday on the UCU’s ballot for industrial action, which has resulted in an unprecedented turnout and an overwhelming support for strike action and action short of a strike.

In the statement, the University says “Industrial action, unfortunately, is not going to make the problem go away”. Nowhere in the statement do they make clear what they think the problem actually is. This leaves us with the question – is this statement purely propaganda?

The reasons for the ballot were clear:

The University continues to threaten its valued staff with compulsory redundancies. Members have demonstrated that they believe that industrial action could make this problem go away.

The University has imposed a disastrous process on the Faculty of Biological Sciences, one which we believe is non-transparent, non-consultative and – in seemingly pre-selecting people for redundancies – in a manner in which could potentially be unlawful. Members have demonstrated that they believe that industrial action could make this problem go away.

The University has bypassed Senate, UCU argues, and ignored a number of its own rules. Members have demonstrated that they believe that industrial action could make this problem go away.

The University has ignored its agreements with UCU and has, in our opinion, failed in both its statutory obligation to consult with staff representatives and its own protocols as regards consultation. Members have demonstrated that they believe that industrial action could make this problem go away.

The reasons for the ballot and for staff disaffection are clear. The problems this University faces are deep-rooted, and recognised by staff of all categories across campus. Removing the above named problems is entirely within the university’s gift. If the University is prepared to address these issues in a meaningful way through negotiation, then it could indeed make industrial action go away.

Record turnout in vote for strike action at University of Leeds

Turnout – 65.8%

‘Yes’ to strike action – 63.8%

‘Yes’ to action short of a strike – 78.1%

.

Union calls for urgent talks to safeguard jobs and win back staff trust

Members of the University and College Union (UCU) at the University of Leeds have today (Wednesday) voted overwhelmingly in favour of both strike action and action short of a strike. The turnout was 66%; the highest figure UCU has ever had in a ballot. The union said the unprecedented turnout was indicative of the strength of feeling among UCU members across the country over savage funding cuts and damaging job losses.

Almost two-thirds (64%) who voted supported strike action and over three-quarters (78%) agreed to action short of a strike. The union said its members at Leeds had made it clear they would defend jobs and courses at the university and called on vice-chancellor, Professor Michael Arthur, to win back the trust of staff by agreeing to serious negotiations.

Professor Arthur, in his role as Head of the Russell Group of universities, has publicly acknowledged that national budget cuts will have a ‘devastating effect’ on staff and students. Yet, under his plans, 54 staff at the University of Leeds have already lost their jobs and up to 700 more are at risk. The university says it is looking to make £35 million worth of savings through an ‘economies exercise’ and all university departments, even those making a surplus, have been told to identify cuts of between 10 to 20%.

UCU said the cuts at Leeds had already inflicted serious damage and warned that further redundancies would lead to higher student:staff ratios than seen in other similar universities and would increase the workload of the staff left behind. The union said the plans had to be shelved to allow the union and university to work together to minimise damage to the university.

UCU will now consult with members about what type of action it might take should the fresh negotiations UCU has called for with management not bear fruit.

Leeds UCU president, Professor Malcolm Povey, said: “UCU members have today delivered a clear mandate for industrial action at the University of Leeds. We thank our members for participating in such large numbers and reiterate our belief that a negotiated settlement is still possible if the vice-chancellor will, at last, recognise the strength of feeling among his workforce. Our priority remains to defend our members and the quality of education experienced by our students.”

UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: “Michael Arthur has himself acknowledged the devastating effect cuts will have on staff and students. The bottom line is that serious job losses will impact massively on the institution’s ability to function as a leading university in the region, let alone globally.

“The university should be working with us to oppose the government’s savage cuts to higher education and must immediately put plans to axe 700 jobs on hold. Now is the time for fresh negotiations and for Michael Arthur to seize the opportunity to win back the trust of the marvellous staff at this university.”

Story on the Guardian online site: here

UCU committee members running for Senate

The voting for election by members of Faculties of seven members of Senate closes this Friday at 12 noon.

Six members of your UCU committee have been nominated, and are listed here below with their supporting statements

Nigel

Nigel Bubb (Leeds Dental Institute) – I have worked at the University since the mid nineties. The University is about to face grave threats from without, it is important that internally the University deals with these in a measured, democratic way. I serve on University of Leeds UCU committee; as such I have been shocked at the management’s disregard to due process and meaningful consultation with regard to FBS. I stand against the erosion of collegiality and democracy that is currently pervading. This has led me to seek involvement in central running of the University

Lai Fong

Lai Fong Chiu (Institute of Health Sciences) – I have been a member of the University’s academic staff since 2001 and a member of the committee of the Leeds University and COllege Union since 2007. Since 2003, as a result of reorganizational turbulence, I have first-hand experience of restructuring and its impacts on my personal and academic life. I understand that there will be many difficult issues facing us in the current Economies Exercise and that this will have serious implications for students, staff, and for the overall shape of the University sector. Members of Senate will need to work hard to meet these challenges and to ensure that decisions made are open and fair.
If elected as a member of the Senate, I will act as an unbiased conduit of information between the governing council and staff. I will work to promote equality, diversity and democratic governance through open communication and dialogue. I believe the knowledge and experience I have gained through my work on the UCU committee make me an ideal candidate to represent the needs of staff and students. I would consider it a privilege to serve on Senate, and look forward to working closely with all of you.

Danni

Danielle Lamb (School of Humanities) - As an officer of Leeds UCU I have been involved in the consultation meetings about the restructuring of the Faculty of Biological Sciences.  I have been horrified by the way that the restructuring there has been carried out; the lack of meaningful consultation with members of staff in FBS, the lack of transparency with which decisions have been made, the lack of respect shown towards all members of the academic team, and the disregard shown for any sense of collegiality or academic freedom.  I believe that the Senate has a vital role to play in reversing the damage that has been done in that faculty, and to the academic reputation of our university.  In order to thrive, the University of Leeds must be a real community, governed by consensus, agreement, and respect for staff, students and the systems of governance in place.  The restructuring of FBS demonstrates that something has gone very wrong with the way this institution is governed, and I believe I have a contribution to make to improving our community.  I take pride in having been at the university, first as a student and then a member of staff, for nearly 13 years, and I would welcome the opportunity to play a role in maintaining this institution as a place of study and work to be proud of.

Chris

Christine Pickering (Leeds Dental Institute) - With a background in governance both in the education an voluntary sectors, I can bring a wealth of experience and enthusiasm to Senate. In order to make informed and appropriate decisions Senate needs to be furnished with accurate and transparent information, and have the confidence to scratch below the surface and ask those penetrating questions. Drilling down to the critical detail and interrogating the differing options in order to reach pragmatic and practical solutions are skills I can bring to Senate.
Working half time for UCU and half time for Dentistry means I am well placed to understand the issues which concern staff, and the work-place stressors which can inhibit excellent performance. The aspiration for an excellent student experience must start with staff who have confidence to deliver to the best of their ability in a supportive and positive environment. Senate can set the tone by making decisions which fully recognise the contributions made by staff who are, indeed, our greatest asset.

Mark

Mark Taylor-Batty (School of English) – As an officer of Leeds UCU, I have been involved in consultation, JCUU and informal meetings with University management since September 2007. My chief concerns as UCU officer have been the mismatch between University commitments to staff through strategy, policy and procedure and the implementation of these things. In recent months I have been concerned to see the governance of our University carried out in ever more flexible manners, to the point of seemingly conflicting with statutory obligations. I was upset to see the announcement of an ‘economies exercise’ before Senate had been informed or before any discussion in Senate had been possible. Against a backdrop of commitments to transparency and consultation, I have witnessed first-hand instances of non-transparent decisions made and non-consultative processes affecting large numbers of staff. My concern at the creeping measures against democratic participation and the compromising of principles of academic freedom has led me to seek to participate more fully at the heart of the academic community. I want a university that is governed by consensus, agreement, and respect for staff, students and the systems of governance in place. Recent events strongly indicate that ours is no longer such a university.

Jeremy

Jeremy Toner (Institute for Transport Studies) – I have served as an elected member of Senate for 14 years. I am currently DLT in Transport Studies and Treasurer of the local association of the University and College Union (having previously served as president).
Elected member must represent the views of ordinary academic and academic-related staff to audiences which may otherwise not hear us. The role of Senate in scrutinising proposals and keeping the executive accountable is ever more important: only elected members can do that properly.
In particular: we must bring an academic perspective to Senate’s deliberations to counterbalance what sometimes appears as a narrow finance-driven agenda; we must strive for greater transparency in the appointment of office-holders in the University and ensure that those appointed are called to answer for their actions in appropriate democratic fora; and we must be vigilant in preventing the bureaucracy associated with aspects of our work getting in the way of our real jobs by arguing for light touch at all times.
I cannot promise a collegiate democratic institution with no money worries. I can promise to keep staff interests and well-being at the heart of every debate and to speak up for the hard-working members of our University

Petition to Lord Mandelson – Claim that University of Leeds broke its own rules

The University of Leeds has been hit with a formal challenge that accuses the institution of breaking key rules on how the university is regulated. The challenge, in the form of a Petition to the Visitor* of the university (Lord Mandelson in his capacity as Lord President of the Council), from a member of staff claims the university bypassed the body responsible for the academic mission of the university, the Senate, when it implemented a restructure plan for the Faculty of Biological Sciences (FBS).

The University and College Union (UCU) has confirmed it is acting on behalf a member of staff in FBS. The action calls for an investigation to determine whether the restructuring plans were already too advanced by the time the Senate had the chance to see and influence them and therefore fulfil its regulatory duty.

The Petition, submitted on Friday (29 January), claims the academic mission is the responsibility of the Senate and that the university’s Council and executive were not empowered, under the university’s rules of governance, to alter it without the consent of the Senate which, UCU claims, was not obtained at the proper time, or indeed at all.

UCU has noted that as a consequence the FBS academic mission has been drastically altered by the loss of staff and the impact is already being felt by students who are now struggling to find a supervisor with the specialist knowledge required. The union has highlighted the Petition made to the Visitor at the University of Keele in 2008 in which the Visitor emphasised importance of the role of Senate.

The Petition also calls for all further action related to a current ‘Economies Exercise’ to find savings and axe more jobs to be put on hold while the Visitor investigates the complaint. The Petition argues that a failure to do so risks the same mistakes being made and that the current proposals being considered by Council and the university management will drastically alter the academic mission of the university. These proposals, it says, must be adequately scrutinised by the Senate.

UCU general secretary, Sally Hunt, said: “Our universities spend millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money and it is right and just that there is proper scrutiny of how they spend that money and why certain decisions around their academic missions are taken. The recent shambles at London Metropolitan University is an all-too recent and painful example of what can happen if proper scrutiny is not given to universities’ decisions and actions.

“No institution can, or can be seen to be, circumnavigating its own governance procedures and an urgent investigation needs to happen so everyone can have full confidence in how Leeds is conducting itself. It is quite right and proper that any further job loss exercises should be put on hold until this situation is properly cleared up.”

*Note: The Visitor of the university is responsible for ensuring that the institution conducts its affairs in accordance with its Charter and Statutes.

Update: The University posts the petition on campusweb