Author: Bee Hughes

Posted on

For a negotiated and fair settlement of the dispute with Unite

Liz Lawrence – Yorkshire and Humberside Regional Secretary

This year UCU members and staff prepared for Congress in the context of a long-running dispute between UCU as an employer and the UCU staff union, UNITE. At Congress 2024 the employment sector conferences didn’t happen due to industrial action by UNITE. We recognise and support the right of UCU staff to take strike action. The cancellation of FESC and HESC meant discussion on industrial strategy didn’t happen, which has affected UCU’s work and should have focused the minds of UCU SMT to resolve the dispute.

Trade union staff do not take industrial action lightly. We appreciate that for highly committed workers it is hard to vote for and take industrial action. So why have our UCU staff felt the need for action? The issues in the dispute include race discrimination, stress and workloads, union recognition and hybrid working. These are all matters which UCU as an employer should have resolved at the negotiating table a long time ago.

What sort of employer should a trade union be? Most members would agree a union should be a model employer. While we recognise that some aspects of a union official’s job – dealing with difficult and hostile employers and members who may be understandably distressed by bullying, discrimination and unfair working conditions – are unavoidably stressful, a union should be as supportive as it can be to its staff.

Unions should set examples as good employers, both because it is the right thing to do in terms of trade union values and because failure to do so will damage the union’s reputation — something which will undoubtedly be exploited by the employers with whom UCU negotiates for workers in post-16 education.

The majority of UCU staff are not experiencing UCU as a good employer. On the contrary they describe their workplace as ‘toxic and dysfunctional’. They say:

I feel more and more disheartened, depressed and stressed by working for UCU.
I keep asking myself ‘why?’ Why am I no longer trusted to do my job?
Why am I no longer allowed to collaborate with colleagues? Why do I suddenly need to be micromanaged?

Some of this no doubt sounds familiar to UCU members working in post-16
education.

This dispute is damaging UCU, both in terms of how demoralised many UCU staff feel and in terms of UCU’s reputation within the wider trade union movement. It is time for a negotiated settlement.

Solidarity with UNITE UCU!

More information and donations to their strike fund can be found here.

Posted on

Casualisation – a blight on post-16 education

Christina Paine (London Met UCU, NEC) and Cecily Blyther (Petroc UCU), both members of the Anti-Casualisation Committee

Across the UK, the post-16 education model is broken as workers struggle under the weight of precarious contracts, redundancies, casualised job losses and impossible workloads. As working conditions continue to race to the bottom we must secure the casualised to stop the casualisation of the secure.

Behind every ‘hourly paid’ or ‘fixed-term contract’ model are stories of poverty wages, homelessness, insecurity, burnout and exploitation. We know casualisation worsens structural inequalities, overwhelmingly impacting women, migrants, racialised and disabled colleagues.

The structural inequality of casualisation needs to be a key focus in our equality work (SFC33). We see the most vulnerable are targeted and are often left feeling “discarded” as contracts vanish with no consultation or redundancy.

Across post-16 education, casualised workers deliver the core teaching, support student learning and keep institutions afloat yet are discarded without consultation, redundancy process and with no safety net.

Casualised staff precarious

As HE institutions parade deficits and launch brutal redundancy and restructuring programmes it’s casualised staff who disappear first with few redundancy rights or recognition.

The pattern repeats in FE. Staff hours are cut, contracts aren’t renewed and layers of redundancy are obscured while management shifts workload to permanent staff already struggling under impossible demands.

The lack of data and monitoring of these job losses is unacceptable. Institutionalised insecurity is the business model for marketised post-16 education. We must support Congress motions calling for UCU to survey branches to document the scale of the job losses.

Key Motions

• HE11 calls for all campaigns against redundancy to protect and defend casualised staff.
• HE22, HE23 and HE24 demand transparency in casualised redundancies and for UCU to survey branches on the scale of job losses among casualised staff.
• FE15 calls for solidarity across casualised and non-casualised staff and protecting casualised staff in campaigns against redundancy.
• FE16 addresses recruitment and retention of casualised workers in FE, calling for a representative working group to develop union work in this area.

Pensions often feel unattainable to casualised workers, yet pension inequality is a huge issue with inconsistent work and huge amounts of unpaid labour leaving them out of pocket in work and in retirement. This is compounded by the introduction of two-tier pensions in some institutions with casualised workers pushed onto inferior schemes. We must fight for all workers to have a decent and secure retirement.

• ROC2 defends universal pension and welfare rights and SFC36 calls for stronger pension action for casualised workers.
• SFC33 calls for UCU to develop a stronger, unified strategy to defend equality and fight casualisation.
• SFC21 targets action on the pitiful Employment Rights Bill and calls for the full repeal of the anti-trade union laws. This is vital for strengthening work to stamp out casualised work in our sectors.

We must fight together against every job loss:
• SFC15 calls for a post-16 strategy to defend education. It is time for action across the union to call for full security for all workers and full government funding for post-16 education.

Starmer’s Labour is Anti-Worker

The Labour government’s so-called Employment Rights Bill fails to offer meaningful protection or a way forward for workers. They’ve climbed down on reversal of the Trade Union Act 2016 and banning zero-hours contracts. The Bill does not guarantee work after regular service and there are no penalties for misuse of casual contracts. It’s a betrayal dressed up in progressive language while leaving thousands of workers out to dry.

Zero-hours contracts remain as legalised precarity. They lock staff into cycles of poverty pay, instability and mental harm. They disproportionately trap women, racialised and disabled workers in second-class employment, excluded from rights and robbed of security.

UK-wide joint action now – enough is enough.

Casualisation is the ground on which every other injustice grows – leading to unpaid work overload, inequality, stress, mental health collapse, bullying and silencing. We must build on recent networks created in our regions and join with sibling unions to build on new strong networks in our regions to give voice to casualised workers.

Our working conditions are the foundations of students’ education in every part of post-16 education and casualisation undermines both. Casualised staff are not disposable. They are central to the sector. We cannot wait any longer – we must all work together to fight for decent jobs and pension justice for all workers.

Posted on

Welfare not Warfare: Defend Disability Benefits – Defend Our Rights

Roddy Slorach (Imperial College UCU) and Christina Paine (London Met UCU and NEC)

Keir Starmer’s government is in big trouble. Its strategy is already in tatters and its support is rapidly disappearing. Many voters are turning in desperation to the racists of Farage’s Reform UK. Labour’s answer is more scapegoating – of migrants, muslims and now of trans people. For many people, the most shocking betrayal is the savage assault on disability
benefits. Cuts to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and incapacity benefit threaten to push at least 250,000 disabled people into poverty.

In her Spring Statement in March, chancellor Rachel Reeves said Labour is “clear whose side we are on.” Her policies have indeed made this clear. The pledge to restrict public spending was rapidly forgotten when Donald Trump demanded European countries ramp up arms spending. Starmer says there is a “moral case” for the cuts to disability benefits – with the savings spent on more deadly weapons like those being used to carry out genocide in Gaza.

Disabled workers across post-16 education are raising the alarm – and UCU is demanding action. Staff are still being denied the most basic reasonable adjustments to do their jobs safely, whilst simultaneously facing a government hell-bent on slashing the support they rely on to live and flourish.

War on the poorest

Disabled people are already poorer than a decade ago. A report to the UN by disability organisations in August 2023 showed the real terms value of UK benefit payments had fallen by over ten percent since 2010. Research by disability charity Scope shows that the average UK disabled household faces extra costs of £1122 per month – making disabled people “almost three times as likely to live in material deprivation than the rest of the population.” With one in ten people of working-age receiving health-related benefits, UCU
members are among those threatened by the cuts.

Health Secretary Wes Streeting tried to divert attention by claiming that the problem is an “overdiagnosis” of mental distress and conditions such as autism and ADHD. The real problem is that more and more of us are struggling to cope in an increasingly barbaric and hostile world.

Fifteen years ago, another Labour government introduced the Equality Act in 2010. It is a deeply flawed law that nevertheless for the first time put disability discrimination on an equal legal footing to racism, sexism and other forms of oppression. Many people believed that the new law would improve life for disabled people – but our employers constantly refuse to meet its most basic requirements.

Toxic narrative

The government’s toxic narrative – that disabled people are work-shy or exaggerate their difficulties – ignores the reality of our communities and workplaces. Across post-16 education, staff report long delays for essential support like screen readers, ergonomic equipment, hybrid work arrangements, or flexible hours. Often, reasonable adjustments never arrive and disabled workers increasingly face job insecurity and loss of hours.

The government’s unacceptable cuts to PIP and other disability benefits have been widely condemned by trade unions, disabled-led organisations and carers’ groups. In a chilling continuation of austerity politics, ministers are tightening assessments and proposing to stop many thousands of people from accessing the support they need to live, whether they are in work or not. All of this is being done under the guise of “fiscal responsibility.”

Among the most vulnerable are the growing number of disabled workers on casualised contracts. Meanwhile, digitalisation and AI-driven teaching models create new barriers and exclusions. Flexible tech could open doors, but instead it’s being used to strip out jobs and further marginalise disabled educators. We need a national campaign for accessible, inclusive and secure workplaces, a zero-tolerance approach to non-compliance on reasonable adjustments and above all a union that is prepared to fight for every job and
every member.

These cuts can be beaten and the fightback starts here. Starmer suspended Labour MPs who refused to support the cuts to winter fuel payments, but this time the threats aren’t working. Disabled People Against Cuts and other organisations have called a series of protests against the cuts under the banner of ‘Welfare not Warfare’. Every Palestinian supporter, every anti-war campaigner and every serious trade unionist needs to get behind this growing rebellion in defence of disability benefits.

Key Motions

The following motions will strengthen and support UCU’s work to fight discrimination against disabled members:
• Universal welfare and equal pensions provision (ROC2 EQ18).
• Ending cuts to PIP and disability benefits, working with wider campaigns for welfare and against military spending (SFC24 SFC25).
• Better support for disabled members to engage with UCU (EQ12) and linking anti-casualisation with equality issues (SFC33).
• Support and guidance for developing robust and inclusive policies (EQ15).
• More robust data to enable effective campaigning (FE32).

These motions will help us in the fight for restoring and securing PIP and disability benefits, a zero-tolerance approach to non-compliance on reasonable adjustments and stronger legal protections for precariously employed disabled members. We need a UK-wide campaign for accessible, inclusive and secure workplaces and greater accountability for institutions that rely on insecure labour while evading their equality duties.

Posted on

Building anti-racist education

Regi Pilling – Westminster Kingsway College and NEC

Racists and the far right have grown in confidence in the US, across Europe and in the UK. Last year, fascist Tommy Robinson organised several large, racist demonstrations under the name “Uniting the Kingdom”, where speaker after speaker claimed Britain was “under attack” from multiculturalism, Muslims and the ‘woke agenda’.

They were hoping to spread their hatred and to normalise their bigotry under the guise of patriotism. Anti-racists successfully mobilised against them, but many were worried – several staff and students talked at our college about how they would stay home that day fearing attack by the racists.

Also last summer, the race riots sent a shock wave through many communities – these were incited and brutal. However, some of our students were clearly pulled by the narrative that the deaths in Southport were caused by immigration. And Reform UK’s anti-migrant propaganda, which is parroted by the media, Conservatives (and some Labour MPs), was repeated by some students.

Within our UCU branch, we decided to take on these lies and build a space for all who were feeling under attack and scared. We organised a Themed Learning Week: Celebrating Multiculturalism — a festival of diversity, protest and change. Staff and students from a wide range of subject areas developed their own projects, which were opened up to
other departments to collaborate with or to attend.

• Students studying Spanish led a debate on whether former colonial powers should apologise for colonialism.
• Fashion students created an exhibition of how fashion can be a form of protest and to celebrate multiculturalism, which was displayed in the main atrium.
• Politics and Sociology students invited Stand Up To Racism for a workshop on campaigning against Reform UK.
• Business students researched the impact and value of immigration to our country and then created an open student debate, and so on.

It was an empowering, enriching week where staff and students were able to take on the arguments and to create an atmosphere where people could feel proud and celebrate their cultural diversity. Through projects like these, we do more than teach. We arm our students with critical consciousness.

Since then, Trump was elected and recent opinion polls indicate that Reform UK could win a General Election if it was held now. And the Labour Party increasingly panders to racist narratives, racing to show it can deport more migrants and police borders harder than the right.

In the face of this onslaught, the role of educators and trade unionists is not simply important — it is urgent and essential. We must campaign against Reform wherever they stand, we must invite anti-racist organisations like Stand Up To Racism into our colleges and universities and we must keep pushing for anti-racist education.

Please support motions at Congress and FESC / HESC that will create policy to ensure UCU carries out this vital work (EQ3, EQ4, FE25, FE26 and HE34).

Posted on

No more lip service on Racism – it’s time for action!

Juliana Ojinnaka – Chair, UCU BMSC

“The very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again, your reason for being.”
– Toni Morrison

As an education union, we have a pressing responsibility to combat racism. Under normal circumstances, this obvious statement would not need to be restated. However, we are currently living in a world that is regressing into a troubling era of hostility and violence against those who are considered “the Other.” In addition to our professional duties, it is
our responsibility to work together in solidarity to create and maintain an environment where Black staff and students feel safe and secure. Everyone should be able to follow their educational and career development without being affected by discrimination in any form.

For our union to effectively organise and counter threats faced by Black members, the approach needs to be strategic, inclusive and unapologetically anti-racist.

  1. Acknowledge and name the problem
    We should recognise institutional racism within our educational institutions and our union itself. We should not use vague language such as “diversity issues” to safeguard against the vulnerabilities facing Black members, we should name racism where it exists. This means publishing all data on racial disparities in employment within our institutions, promotion, disciplinary actions and leadership representation.
  1. Build structures led by Black members
    It is important to ally with all who want to fight racism, but it is essential for Black members to have leading roles. Depending on numerical strength, we should establish networks or committees for Black members, with clear roles, budgets and autonomy to organise, manage campaigns and contribute directly to union policy. We should argue for proportional representation of Black educators at all levels of leadership and in decision-making bodies.
  2. Political education and anti-racism training
    UCU should provide compulsory anti-racism training for all union staff, representatives and the training should be open to members. This shouldn’t be limited to unconscious bias workshops but a thorough structural analysis of racism, which is essential for our collective understanding and action. It should incorporate political education about colonialism, structural racism and Black radical traditions as a core aspect of union work.
  3. Challenge racism in the workplace.
    We must proactively support Black members facing racism, whether from management, colleagues, students, or parents. Utilise the union’s legal, organising and campaigning resources to address racist incidents and policies, such as discriminatory recruitment practices or the implementation of biased disciplinary or observation measures. We must insist that colleges and universities audit racial disparities in pay, promotion, exclusions and
    disciplinary actions.
  4. Campaign around Issues Affecting Black Communities.
    UCU should resist the number of student exclusions, police police presence on site, surveillance and discriminatory curricula. We should regularly update and publicise materials on decolonising the curriculum and campaign for culturally appropriate mental health support. Our branches and regions could collaborate with community organisations focused on anti-racism and Black liberation to support these activities.
  1. Transform UCU
    We must audit and change internal processes that exclude or marginalise Black members (e.g. election and selection processes, meeting accessibility and union culture). Set targets and accountability structures for leadership diversity, especially now that we are in the process of electing and selecting members for committees and subcommittees. Address and confront racism within the union when it occurs, including from fellow members.
  1. Use the Union’s Power
    Utilise strikes, protests and campaigns to highlight and oppose racism. Racism is not just a workplace issue, it is a health and safety issue too. As a union we should support broader anti-racist movements, from Black Lives Matter to campaigns against immigration raids.

“In a racist society, it is not enough to be non-racist, we have to be anti
racist” – Angela Davis

Posted on

Trans Rights Are Human Rights

Bee Hughes, LJMU UCU and LGBT+ Members’ Standing Committee

On April 16th a group of women stood drinking champagne outside the UK’s Supreme Court in celebration of a ruling on the legal definition of ‘woman’. Many of us felt disappointed, upset and furious at such a callous display.

Many of us cannot fathom the lack of empathy that leads to rejoicing at celebrating removal of the right of trans women to be legally recognised as women and overturns generations of feminist activism that strove to stop women being defined by biology. The irony is clearly lost on some of these anti-trans campaigners.

At the time of writing, the full ramifications of the Supreme Court’s ruling are unclear. As days and weeks progress more government ministers and politicians are doubling down on their normalisation of transphobia.

In the immediate wake of the ruling, public bodies are scrambling to update guidance and policies in the light of the ruling solidifying existing guidance on ‘single-sex spaces’ – something which was already provided for under the Equality Act 2010. The ruling also removes protection from sex-based discrimination from trans and non-binary people, though they are still protected from discrimination under the category of gender reassignment.

What we do know is that this ruling will embolden those who hold anti-trans beliefs, or who wish to use transphobia to advance political agendas. Trans people are scared. Our rights, safety and dignity are under attack at the highest levels of society. The Labour government continues to restrict and degrade healthcare for trans people and target gender affirming care for trans young people.

Trans UCU members and their allies have fought to make our union and our workplaces safe and accepting places for gender non-conforming people to learn and work. We have championed our institutions to develop inclusive policies and practices, and held them to account when they have fallen short. We must continue to do so. UCU must be unequivocal in its condemnation of the ruling and subsequent change in policies by our universities or other institutions.

In the face of continued political hostility from Starmer’s Labour, Trump’s administration in the US and queerphobia globally, your trans, non-binary and gender non-conforming students and colleagues need you more than ever. We urge you to:

• Put out messages of support to your members reiterating UCU’s policies around self-identification and that trans rights are human rights.
• Join local and national protests for trans rights and bring along your branch banners.
• Get involved in campaigns and networks like Trade Unions for Trans Rights.
• Keep a close eye on any policy shifts at your workplace and challenge them wherever possible.
• Show you are trans inclusive at work – wear a progress pride lanyard, trans ally badge and add your pronouns to your email signature.
• Connect with trans-led organisations for information about trans people, e.g. Gendered Intelligence, Trans Actual, Mermaids (for supporting trans kids and teens).
• Support UCU’s strong inclusive policies by voting for trans inclusive motions and emergency motions at UCU Congress.

We know the current government is no friend to workers and those who support Palestine, or want action or climate change and so on – we have to just as we did the Tories – on the streets as well as at the ballot box.

The trans community and our allies were quick to mobilise and the weekend after the ruling up to 25,000 marched through London, 2000 in Edinburgh and hundreds gathered in many cities around the country. We must ensure that trade unions are visible and loud in their support of the trans community and we will continue to organise within UCU and with our
sibling trade unions to build solidarity and resistance.

The law is often understood as there to protect us, but many of those who have faced oppression and discrimination know that instead it serves the most powerful in society. Remember, we beat Section 28 and we will beat this. This ruling does not change who you are, and how we see you, yesterday, today or tomorrow. Trans women are women, trans men are men and non-binary people are valid and deserve to be seen as they are.

Posted on

Organising for Palestine on campus: from repression to resistance

Anne Alexander, comms officer for Cambridge UCU and a member of
University and College Workers for Palestine and BRICUP

The past year has seen a significant escalation in repressive tactics by universities against protest for Palestine on UK campuses, mainly targeting students. Many UCU branches and activists have played an important role in building solidarity campaigns to protect student activists and the ability to collectively protest, but more needs to be done at a national level to organise a fightback.

Back in August 2024, University and College Workers for Palestine documented a wide set of repressive tactics deployed by university managements working in collaboration with security companies and sometimes the police. Although at a much lower level than the repression of pro-Palestine protests in other countries, such as the US and Germany, these
attempts to discipline and criminalise student protesters is deeply worrying.

Examples include violent arrests of students in Newcastle, Oxford and SOAS; victimisation of student activists at Birmingham, Essex, SOAS and LSE through long-running disciplinary cases, where some were banned from campus and threatened with expulsion. Even though legal charges have often been dropped later, or no disciplinary action taken after the
investigation – the impact on individuals targeted has been immense.

In two recent cases, University of London and Cambridge University used High Court injunctions in an attempt to pre-emptively ban protests on or near university-owned land. Breaching a court order puts students, staff and members of the public at risk of fines or even imprisonment.

The increasing legal threats to protest rights for students and staff on campus should concern every trade unionist and activist. The injunction obtained by the University of Cambridge targets all types of protest, not only solidarity action for Palestine. It affects a location in the centre of the city which has been used for decades as a rallying point by trade unions and local campaigns.

It comes alongside other attacks on the right to protest and speak about Palestine, such as the prosecution of leading figures in the Palestine Solidarity Campaign and Stop the War Coalition after police restrictions and mass arrests on the 18 January demonstration, the arrest of Youth Demand activists in a Quaker Meeting House and the use of counter-terrorism laws to try and silence people speaking out against genocide, such as Cardiff activist Kwabena Devonish who faces trial in August. None of this can be separated from examples of authoritarian policing, such as the intervention to stop picketing by striking bin workers in Birmingham and the harsh sentencing of climate activists on charges of “conspiracy” for taking part in a zoom call.

Yet repression is only half the picture – many of these cases galvanised greater solidarity and organising by staff and students to push back. When the University of Leicester brought police to arrest students occupying a university building in November, the UCU branch put out a strong statement pointing out that student occupations played a key role in the campaigns against the Vietnam War and South African Apartheid.

University of London took three student activists to the High Court to obtain an injunction against them organising BDS protests on part of its land. UCU, Unison and IWGB branches from across the UoL’s Bloomsbury colleges helped to co-organise a major rally condemning the injunction on the workplace day of action for Palestine, 28 November.

In Cambridge, the University’s rush to obtain a High Court injunction targeting pro-Palestinian protests in February spurred staff and students to work together on a public and legal campaign contesting this repressive move online, in the streets and in court. The University was forced to retreat on several aspects of its original request to the court, including targeting the student-led campaign, Cambridge for Palestine, by name. National
and international pressure played an important role through open letters condemning the University from Gina Romero, UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Assembly and UCU General Secretary Jo Grady.

Battles over the right to protest shouldn’t obscure the scale of the audience for Palestine solidarity organising – and how this audience continues to grow and develop. University and College Workers for Palestine and BRICUP worked with UCU nationally to organise a highly successful tour, implementing a resolution at UCU congress in 2024.

Between October 28 and November 6, the Campus Voices for Palestine tour visited 8 cities across the UK with a message of solidarity against scholasticide and amplifying the calls by staff and students from Palestinian universities for BDS. Sundos Hammad from the ‘Right to Education’ campaign from Birzeit University and Ahmed Shaban of the Emergency
Committee for the Universities of Gaza were able to connect with activists across the UK which also boosted local organising.

Workplace days of action have continued to bring staff and students together to highlight institutional complicity in genocide and war crimes. Initiatives like these are taking on a significance beyond the question of Palestine, with the current tilt towards militarism from governments worldwide. Labour’s appalling decision to steal money from disabled people in Britain in order to boost the profits of arms companies creating weapons to kill and maim
people in Palestine and around the world has rightly enraged activists across the country.

In the coming year, we should be looking to build as many links as possible between the Palestine movement and wider campaigns challenging the drive to war.
• Donate to the legal campaign over the University of London and Cambridge injunctions here .
• Resources from the Campus Voices for Palestine tour here
• Download BRICUP’s pamphlet on BDS, sign the Academic Commitment for Palestine and find other resources here.

Posted on

Stop and reverse the cuts to Adult Skills Funds

Safia Flissi, ESOL Lecturer at South and City College Birmingham and NEC

The government’s recent announcement of a 6% cut in Adult Skills Funding (ASF) is yet another slap in the face for FE, ACE and our learners. Without resistance it will undoubtedly lead to mass course closures; making education inaccessible for many adults particularly those with few or no qualifications, unemployed, ESOL learners, adults with learning difficulties or disabilities and working adults on low incomes. In short the ASF cuts will hit the most disadvantaged and marginalised adults in our society.

Adult Education has a long history of creating educational opportunities, breaking down barriers and empowering adults. But since 2010, funding to adult education has reduced considerably. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, public funding for adult skills has declined by a third compared to its inflation adjusted peak in the early 2000s. That alone is terrible, however, it’s even worse when examining expenditure on classroom-based learning. This has fallen by two-thirds – from £5.1 billion to £1.7 billion by 2023/24, leading to a 47% reduction in adult learners. These cuts disproportionately affected lower-level
courses, making them unaffordable to deliver and thus limiting access for those seeking to upskill or retrain.

The Department for Education (DfE) has justified these cuts as necessary fiscal measures. However, this perspective overlooks the long-term economic benefits of adult education. Investing in adult skills contributes to a more adaptable workforce, reduces unemployment, and fosters innovation. The current funding reductions are counterproductive, undermining efforts to build a resilient economy. The DfE’s approach fails to consider the social value of FE colleges and Adult Education. But education is always more than simply “economic metrics”. Adult learning promotes personal development, mental health, economic growth, community development and social cohesion. FE colleges and Adult Education often serve as a lifeline for marginalised groups, providing pathways to employment and social inclusion. Reducing access to these programmes exacerbates inequality and hampers community development.

Colleges across the country are grappling with the consequences of reduced funding. For instance, NCG’s colleges report that demand for adult education is so high that they are delivering beyond their allocated budgets, making it impossible to support current student numbers. Lewisham College Principal Jamie Stevenson refers to the cuts as “unjust cuts” and reminds us that “Those figures aren’t just numbers or a funding amount. They are real people who need these opportunities.” In the West Midlands a vast number of FE colleges have large adult provisions and the impact of the cuts to ASF could have disastrous
consequences not only for FE colleges but also for the wider community.

South and City College Birmingham (SCCB), where I teach, is sadly a perfect example of where the cuts to ASF could jeopardise its future. SCCB has a large adult provision, it is a pivotal institution in the West Midlands, offering a wide range of adult education programmes aimed at upskilling the local workforce and supporting community development. Given Birmingham City Council’s financial challenges, including a declaration of effective bankruptcy, the college’s reliance on ASF becomes even more critical. Any reductions in this funding could lead to:

• Course reductions and the potential elimination of programmes essential for adult learners seeking to improve their qualifications.
• Job losses & hiring freezes, affecting the college’s capacity to deliver quality education.
• Limiting communities by reducing educational opportunities for adults in Birmingham, hindering efforts to address unemployment and social mobility.

The reduction in ASF poses a significant risk to institutions like NCG’s colleges, SCCB and others across the UK that provide vital adult education services. The cuts are a short-sighted approach undermining both individual potential and collective prosperity. In the face of escalating welfare cuts and sustained attacks on students and staff across post-16 education, it is more vital than ever to defend a broad, inclusive curriculum—one that meets the needs our most vulnerable learners including SEND learners, one that recognises gender diversity, and actively addresses issues of race, class, and inequality. By restoring investment in this vital sector, we can empower individuals, strengthen communities, and build a more equitable and resilient society.

As the UK looks to strengthen its workforce for future challenges, restoring and increasing ASF should be seen as an investment in people, not a cost. Political will is essential to reversing these funding cuts. Advocacy by education leaders, unions, and think tanks has brought the issue into the spotlight, but real change requires sustained pressure on policymakers by the trade union movement.

UCU must act now. UCU’s campaign to reverse the cuts should include lobbies and demonstrations at Parliament to push the issue into the political spotlight, issue media alerts and build public awareness of what’s at risk. UCU must seek to work with the WEA, TUC, ESOL campaigners and others to build a broad, cross union coalition to protect adult provisions.

Let’s not accept these cuts. Let’s expose them, fight them, and reverse them. The future of our communities, our colleges, and our learners depends on it.

Posted on

FE needs unity in action to improve funding

Richard McEwan (New City College) and Regi Pilling (Westminster Kingsway
College), both NEC and national FE pay negotiators

The Starmer government has signalled its intent to continue austerity, cutting adult education budgets and slashing welfare and disability payments relied on by many students and staff. The DofE is recommending a 2.8% pay award, but it’s unfunded meaning more realterms pay cuts. As we are all too keenly aware, colleges were left out of the last pay award entirely. The promised £300m will not go far after years of cuts, rising student numbers and rising costs like national insurance, which the government is no longer covering. The situation is unlikely to improve with the Comprehensive Spending Review later this year – further education funding will still be woeful and unable to meet the ambitions of the New Deal claim. In this context, the decisions of this year’s FE sector conference will really matter.

Events have moved significantly since the special sector conference last spring. Employers, through the National Joint Forum (NJF), have committed to exploring how binding national bargaining can be implemented in England FE. Two special meetings have scoped this out, tied to a desire for pay parity with schools. England FE remains the only part of UK education without proper national bargaining, making it the poorest sector and unable
to put coherent demands to government.

Although it is still early days, there is a convergence of interests as employers seek to address the recruitment crisis. It is clear that a new bargaining system is coming, but whether it favours us or the employers will depend on our industrial strength. Achieving a binding framework will require additional government funding and cannot be won through local strikes alone. Therefore, UCU needs to launch an England-wide campaign of protests, demonstrations, and strikes. Securing a national framework could transform pay and conditions — we must seize this opportunity with a decisive strategy.

Moreover, the FEC and the secretariat now agree that the time is right to escalate the New Deal claim to national action – this is also reflected in the motions to conference. However, whether this turns into action remains to be seen, especially with the IBL / CUD (the right in UCU) holding a majority on the FEC. They have historically opposed action, including
recently opposing a motion for UCU to hold an indicative ballot to find out if members would strike to gain the equivalent 5.5% school teachers’ pay award. Therefore, the critical question is how and when we escalate our current campaign.

We could be in a much stronger position. In March 2023, a majority of England FE members voted for national action — an achievement that took the NEU years to reach – however little action was taken by UCU. This academic year, action by 30 sixth form colleges on FE pay over the 5.5% award caught the attention of employers and government- most 6th form colleges have now gained that pay award.

Yet UCU took two years to issue a briefing explaining our campaign for national bargaining, and no local FE strikes occurred this year — a first. Last year, despite strong indicative ballots, over 75 branches opted out of action. This demobilisation and lack of national leadership led to low settlements and made life harder for those branches that fought. The local action strategy has run its course. If we are to win, we cannot repeat these mistakes.

At this year’s FESC all the motions call for nationally coordinated action. However, timing is key. In FE, the best time to act is near the start of the academic year, when local and national negotiations occur and before the October census date, which is critical for student funding. Management are very worried about strikes at this point as students still have the ability to move to other institutions. Striking after enrolment but before the census date gives us maximum leverage.

We also need mass, coordinated action. Members understand that local strikes alone cannot address sector-wide issues. A campaign mobilising colleges together will be far more powerful and will raise confidence amongst members.

We support all motions. FE2 should be amended to encourage strong branch participation. What we are trying to do as a union requires branches to act in the overall interest of the union’s claim. FE3 and FE9 call for a national ballot, which we also support. Whether aggregated or disaggregated, the important thing is a united, England-wide ballot. It has been clarified to FEC that all previous national ballots were technically disaggregated. This should be explained clearly to the conference. If passed, the FEC can implement the
motions as we have for previous national ballots.

We hope you have a good conference and that we come out with a clear plan to fight for our claim and win it. If we get this right in addition to fighting for our own pay and conditions, we will have a strong voice to stop more attacks on our communities’ access to education.

Posted on

From Boom to Bust to Fightback? We need to mobilise our members to defend the University

Sean Wallis – London Regional Secretary

After 15 years of seemingly limitless market-led expansion of Higher Education, the UK university sector is facing the biggest crisis in its history. It is worth briefly remembering how we got here. Any solution to the crisis has to talk about how we get onto a stable financial footing, and what that will look like.

The 2010/2011 Willets Plan for English Universities had the following elements:
• Up to £9,000 tuition fees for home students (equating to a profit of some £2,000 per student)
• Abolition or partial reduction of the block grant subsidy (which was calculated on a quota basis per subject area)
• (2014) Abolishing student recruitment caps (apart for regulated courses like Medicine)
• (2017) Changing the regulatory regime from a quality assurance model to a deregulated ‘consumer complaints’ one.

These home undergraduate tuition fees were backed up by student loans costing some ~£20bn a year to the Treasury. Alongside increases in home student fees, unregulated overseas student fees were allowed to soar.

This system initially appeared to work, although not how politicians had imagined. First, nearly all universities found that charging less than £9,000 per student did not help them recruit, so the Tory idea of a ‘genuine’ marketplace with different prices turned out to be a pipe dream. Second, faced with a lifetime of debt, students tended to pick subjects they were confident about. Humanities, rather than maths and science courses, found themselves the main beneficiaries. This meant that students tended to repay their loans at a lower level than Willets and co had planned: over the then 30-year loan period, the Treasury reckoned only half the loan would be paid.

Nonetheless, after caps on recruitment went in 2014, many universities gambled on long-term expansion, taking out 20 or 30-year loans to build new campuses. But that was OK, interest rates were at an all-time low and property prices were surging. What could possibly go wrong?

Then in 2017, Jeremy Corbyn nearly found himself Prime Minister as a leftwing Labour Party programme saw his party surge to nearly beating Teresa May (with 40% against the Tories’ 42.4% of the popular vote) – an increase explained in part by the youth vote and a popular call to abolish university tuition fees. In response, the Conservatives announced a review of HE funding, to which the financier Philip Augar was eventually appointed in
2018.

Augar’s review was delayed by first Brexit and then Covid. Augar’s solution, eventually implemented by Michele Donelan in 2023, was to tinker with the market formula, changing the loans system to a 40-year repayment scheme with an RPI rate of interest, and lower earnings thresholds for repayment. The Institute for Fiscal Studies calculated that working class students would pay back more, wealthy students would likely pay less. Whereas the earlier scheme was closer to a hefty 9% graduate tax, the new scheme was more like a Treasury-backed loan, which students would be made to pay. These changes added at least £30,000 to the cost of education over the student’s lifetime – some estimates put figures closer to £60,000.

What would a sustainable alternative look like?

By 2019 the market system was getting close to failure, for anyone who cared to look. In 2020, a rapidly-convened Convention for Higher Education statement was launched in Parliament during the Covid lockdown. The proposals it put forward did not abolish the market system, but were designed to rein it in and address the social inequalities created by the market. They included:

• Restoration of maintenance grants.
• Resources to tackle inequalities of access (prioritising social groups in disadvantaged circumstances, whether on the basis of locality, socio-economic class, ethnicity or disability; and to unemployed adult returners).
• Immediate reduction in tuition fees by 30%, with the balance made up by the government.
• Restoration of student recruitment caps, backed up by direct public funding to support struggling institutions through a temporary dip in recruitment.
• Senior salaries should be restricted to a 6:1 ratio, and casualised staff given secure contracts.
• Abolition of racist and discriminatory policies towards international staff and students.
• Democratisation of internal university governance.

The Convention Statement was supported by the Labour Shadow Minister for Higher Education, Emma Hardy. Her statement at the launch is worth reading, especially in the light of shallow promises from Bridget Phillipson and Jacqui Smith. The Convention’s broad-based efforts in getting the ear of the Government, Lords and Labour in opposition contrasts with UCU’s so-far feeble lobbying campaign.

The fight we need

We cannot fight redundancies of 10,000 a year on a university-by-university basis. We need to take the fight to Government. When that has been done – as in Dundee – the union has been able to spearhead a defence of Higher Education and marshal the overwhelming majority of public opinion in our favour.

University of Dundee planned to cut 632 jobs – the UCU branch took 3 weeks of strike action in February and March. UNISON and UNITE also balloted successfully. Together they built an excellent campaign with large pickets, general meetings and public rallies involving other trade unionists and politicians from the Scottish National Party, Labour and Green Party. But critically they pressured the Scottish government to act. Consequently MSPs questioned University of Dundee management and the Scottish government stepped in providing additional funding. The fight is not over for Dundee – but it shows what can be
done when the fight is taken to government.

But most of the time our national union is not pushing out to make the big arguments. Instead union branches have been advised to negotiate locally. Branch reps are being asked merely to hand-hold members as they are escorted through notionally ‘Voluntary’ and inevitably Compulsory Redundancy Consultations. Even when branches are allowed to strike, it is often too little and too late.

Making the big arguments means we have to fight for the future – for the defence of subject areas and departments, as well as for universities and access. That’s why we need to spell out short-term demands as well as long-term goals.

We need to mobilise the whole of the union to take UK-wide action in the face of this crisis. At Congress there are several motions in front of HESC which propose slightly different mechanisms to put together a fight to defend jobs and defend the sector. Ultimately which the union decides to back is for HE Sector Conference to decide. But we should not allow differences in tactics to get in the way of unity around a common plan to mobilise branches, to win ballots and to fight to defend the sector.