We can’t afford more of this muddled leadership

At yesterday’s Higher Education Committee (HEC) meeting (15 September 2023), UCU General Secretary Jo Grady, and her supporters on the HEC, the Commons and IBL groupings, sought to put the knife into our HE #FourFights dispute. 

They called a Special HEC meeting with less than 24 hours notice to discuss the calling off of the five days of strike action taking place from the following week. This was after it took the GS six weeks to hold a Special HEC and Branch Delegate Meeting to put them on!

HEC stopped short at calling off the strikes altogether. But they agreed a motion to allow branches to individually withdraw from the strike action. [Note]

This is a massive error, even if in some cases good activists can pivot their action around deductions. Overall it will be highly divisive, leading to a fragmentation of the union’s united fight against the employers. In our market-driven and crisis-ridden HE sector, it risks undermining national pay bargaining altogether. 

Unions are built on the understanding that unity is strength. A key motive for the strikes was to pull the union together out in the open after a highly effective but fragmented MAB behind closed doors. We have unfinished business with UCEA and UUK.

Worse still, this decision sets a dangerous precedent for the future. Are we now to have emergency HEC meetings when branches wobble? Should we routinely allow branches to opt out of strike action if they choose?

Indeed, why did we aggregate our ballots in the first place?  An aggregated ballot means we all act together, not then have local opt-outs.

Democracy has been ridden over roughshod. Not only was no Branch Delegate Meeting held prior to the HEC, but an attempt to prevent debate on  motions from HEC members had to be defeated in the meeting itself. This would have left HEC voting only on a preset set of recommendations in a report from a senior UCU official standing in for Jo Grady. 

How we got to this stage has been spelled out here.

The strike dates remain on. But the current mandate is in danger of ending in further fragmentation and chaos, weakening the ability to unite the union in the forthcoming ballot.

Keep the Strikes On!

Members are rightly asking how we got here. But the most immediate question is what should we do now?

Local branch officers have been urged to canvass support for the strikes and decide whether they should call them off, branch by branch. So two branches in the same city will independently consult their members, each guessing what the other thinks. 

The truth is that there are good reasons for keeping up the action. But there is also confusion and anger arising from the abrupt end of the MAB and the lack of financial support and leadership from the top of the union. So no-one can be sure which way votes will go.

Branches should call Emergency General Meetings to meet and decide, before Wednesday’s 2pm deadline. But despite the time pressure, e-polls or decisions by Committee Meetings are far less democratic than a General Meeting. A basic principle of trade union democracy is that we debate first, vote second. Members must have the opportunity to hear the debate before voting.

Strikes are collective. A show of hands is collective. A debate and a vote is collective. E-polls are not.

Jo Grady has now written to every member, so messages explaining how the branch will decide need to go out promptly!

Should we ‘go local’?

One option that some activists are focusing on is the prospect of using the option of calling off the action as leverage in local negotiations, especially where members face large pay deductions. Last year, many branches negotiated the exit from the MAB and saw a variety of local wins as well as zero deductions in most cases. Why not do it again now?

Many of the activists making this case rightly see a key problem in the national industrial strategy being the failure in leadership by the GS. But there is a danger here. However well-intentioned, a strategy oriented on local wins has a local logic: it points to local bargaining, local affordability – and local employer belligerence.

It is not a surprise that some see a move to local bargaining, with the ability to call off strikes for local wins such as the return of deducted pay for MABers, as a way out of this chaos. Indeed, the fact that such moves are possible in stronger branches is evidence that this action offers leverage – contrary to the General Secretary, who wanted the strikes to be simply called off. 

Unfortunately, the risk is that only the strongest branches will feel able to take the action, members will be divided and many will end up feeling let down by colleagues who voted against strikes in their support, however reluctantly.

Arguing for a UK-wide focus

The best outcome of this crisis, despite the disastrous strategy pursued by Jo Grady and her acolytes, would be to fight to maintain the UK-wide action. We don’t agree with giving members a Hobson’s Choice, i.e. no choice. We do think that unity is strength.

Objectively there is every reason to do so.

The Scottish branches of Aberdeen, Dundee, Glasgow, Glasgow Caledonian and Strathclyde are starting their strikes from next week, while Brighton, Stirling, LJMU, Manchester, Sheffield Hallam, QMUL and Sheffield continue their strikes  or disputes. They are not being asked to reconsider their strikes. It is not local action alone, but action in the context of united UK-wide action, that has pushed many employers into offering local agreements in the MAB.

Second, the strikes are part of a UK-wide campaign. The ballot and its GTVO campaign will again be run on a UK-wide (‘aggregated’) basis.

Third, our strikes are politically effective because when we strike we highlight that the poor learning conditions of our students are our working conditions. Employers have been thoroughly lambasted for abandoning academic standards. 

Now they face disruption at the start of the 2023-24 academic year, followed by a ballot for action later in the academic year. 

Our strikes strengthen our message that the sector is broken and that change must come soon. And we are prepared to stand up and fight for it.

*Note

In an earlier version of this statement, we incorrectly reported that members of the independent left voted for the ‘branch opt-out’ motion (it was a secret poll). They have assured us that they did not, so we apologise and have corrected this report.

90 colleges in 120 UCU branches across England are balloting for industrial action to secure an above inflation pay award, a workload agreement and a binding national framework agreement. This is the biggest ballot in FE for a decade and reflects the anger and injustice felt by those who work in FE.

We were all praised for the work we carried out in the pandemic, government ministers took to the airways to say how vital FE is to rebuilding the economy but have cut funding year on year since 2010. Lecturers’ pay lags behind that of school teachers by 15%, which has led to the worst recruitment crisis in the sector for two decades.

This year the government has given an extra £500 m over two years but this is not enough and doesn’t even take us back to pre-2010 levels. However, there is more money at a local level and this extra cash must be ring-fenced for pay.

Our campaign is attempting to do two things simultaneously: First, put pressure on the government and the AoC for a new deal for FE, which includes more funds, a national workload framework agreement and to level up the sector by introducing a national binding framework agreement. Second, to force the local employers to tell the AoC and government that they agree to these demands and agree to an above inflation pay award.

To be successful in achieving these aims we will need to use our collective strength through all branches taking action together. Last year’s nationally coordinated campaign only a small minority of branches got pay deals that could be considered good or ok deals. Only one of these was above inflation. The vast majority either got no deals or poor deals. Fighting as individual units plays into the hands of the local employer. They plead poverty and blame the government for not being able to concede to our demands. By fighting as individual units, branches feel isolated and then feel forced to accept way below inflation pay awards.

All those branches that have participated in this kind of action have laid the basis for a more effective campaign this year. However, to ensure that this reality is realised we can’t repeat the same branch by branch strategy simply battling it out with local employers. We need to take our fight to all the employers and government using our collective power where we all come out together and not settle for the first derisory offer made by a local employer.

Unity and leadership

It is very disappointing that the chair of FE and one of the vice chairs have gone against FEC policy by using their numbers, as national FEC officers, to vote to exclude their branches from the ballots. Both their branches achieved over 50% turnouts and their members voted overwhelmingly to take action. Their rationale for withdrawing from the ballot is on the basis that one believes that they are in talks over pay and balloting now would put these talks in jeopardy and the other their branch doesn’t have capacity to run a GTVO campaign.

Both the reasons given are weak and illogical. As any of us who have been involved in negotiations at local or national level will explain – it always puts union negotiators in a more powerful position when they enter negotiations with a live ballot in their pockets – you have some leverage, without it you are left to the ‘goodwill’ of the employers and we know where that gets us….

As for capacity, if it is really the case that the President-Elect, the FEC chair’s own branch does not have the capacity to be a part of a nationally coordinated campaign surely, she must reflect on her position on being able to lead the England-wide campaign?

Both are national negotiators. It doesn’t put us in a great position, indeed it appears to undermine our position, when the lead negotiators won’t be taking action and settling for deals that undermine what we are trying to do at the national negotiations. 

As FE members vote to take strike action in the knowledge that they will have strike pay deducted from their wages it is not a good look , to say the least, that the Chair and one of the Vice -chairs won’t be.

We call on all FEC members to unite behind the agreed strategy. Settling for local below inflation pay deals will not strengthen local or national bargaining positions, it will let the employers locally and nationally off the hook at a time when we are in one of the best positions we have been in for a very long time to win decent pay awards and level up the sector – let’s not waste this opportunity.

Dharminder Singh Chuhan FEC UK-elected, Sandwell College 
Nina Doran FEC UK-elected, City of Liverpool College 
Peter Evans FEC LGBT+, Ealing, Hammersmith & West London College 
John Fones FEC South, Bridgwater & Taunton College 
Naina Kent FEC UK-elected, Hackney ACE 
Richard McEwan FEC London & East, New City College 
Juliana Ojinnaka FEC Black members, The Sheffield College 
Regi Pilling FEC Women members, Capital City College Group 
Doug Webley FEC Midlands, South and City College Birmingham
Elaine White FEC North East, Bradford College 
Sean Vernell FEC UK elected, City and Islington College 
John James FE Wales, Coleg Gwent Newport

Our union is in a crisis made by the General Secretary and her supporters.

The crisis is due to a combination of two factors: the sudden calling off of the MAB without support for branches, and the failure of the union to call a summer re-ballot. It has, understandably, undermined the confidence of many members in the five days of strike. But this crisis is due to the GS’s actions. And it is happening at a very dangerous moment for our union.

Now she has called a special meeting of the Higher Education Committee (HEC) with one day’s notice, citing a requisition request from HEC members, in order to overturn decisions made by branch delegates at the Branch Delegate Meeting (BDM) on 11 August. At that BDM, delegates voted 2:1 in favour of calling five days of strike action at the end of the mandate.

The principle of holding a Branch Delegate Meeting before HEC meetings to discuss the dispute is UCU policy, thanks to resolutions of both HE Sector Conference and HEC. Yet no BDM was called prior to this HEC meeting. The contrast between the six week delay in calling a recall HEC meeting to get the re-ballot called, and a one day turnaround now could not be more obvious.

We need to make two basic points:

1. This strike action could be highly effective. Five days at the start of term affects employer’s revenue streams when it matters to them. It sends a clear message to employers, students and staff that UCU means to rebuild, reballot and come back with more action in the academic year. This is why the BDM voted so strongly for it.

2. Democracy is central to everything we do. Members have shown they are prepared to make tremendous sacrifices if their voices are respected. UCU Left has consistently argued that decisions about the action must be made by branch delegates (and branches) rather than the HEC. That is why it is wrong to call a snap HEC to reverse a decision made by a BDM.

Why strike now?

The objective rationale for the strikes has not changed with the end of the MAB. It would be a mistake to cancel the strikes. The start of term is a powerful moment in most university calendars. For one thing, many students have not yet paid their fees.

This could be five days when we make the case nationally and to students about the future of UK Higher Education. Alongside junior doctors and consultants, we could be putting health and education to the top of the political agenda. In some cases UNITE and UNISON branches are taking strike action with us.

The HE fee-based funding model is broken. Unless it is addressed, the future is rounds of redundancies and course closures, with students continuing to pay tuition fees saddling them with debt for their working lives. No other university system in Europe operates like this.

Members have shown enormous courage and sacrifice during the marking and assessment boycott, which has had a very considerable impact at many universities across the UK. But it was not backed up by national strikes, as April’s Special HE Sector Conference decided.

National strike action leaves those taking local strike action like Brighton, Stirling, Liverpool John Moores, Durham and Queen Mary less isolated, and makes employers think twice before embarking on job cuts or reneging on pension promises. These branches are showing the way.

The strike days can also break with the relative isolation of the marking and assessment boycott, and restore a collective sense to help get the vote out in our re-ballot. 

What is going on?

We are seeing a concerted effort by the General Secretary and her supporters to stop the action and then blame the left on the HEC for the crisis. There is a (small) majority for the right on HEC, in which supporters of the General Secretary vote as a block with the old right. She needs an alibi for the upcoming General Secretary election. A late reballot gives her a platform to tour branches before the election process starts..

The HEC met twice over the summer. On June 30, it voted narrowly to seek an ‘interim deal’ to restore deductions and end the MAB. UCU Left members voted against this because it was not what members were taking action for, it abandoned our leverage and allowed the employers to play for time to avoid a summer ballot – which is precisely what happened. (This is the same mistake that the union made in March with The Pause and the ACAS talks.) 

At that meeting, the General Secretary proposed a paper, entitled “Building for Success” with a timeline of re-ballot and industrial action meaning that we could only take action in January – in contradiction to the overwhelming majority of Sector Conference, only weeks before. This is why supporters of UCU Left and the wider left voted against an extension of the HEC meeting to overturn HE Sector Conference policy and stop a re-ballot. (The minutes of this meeting should be available online.) Indeed, the General Secretary has responsibility for the work of staff at headquarters and should have allocated staff resources for preparation of the summer re-ballot. Preparation could have begun straight after Congress had closed, and the re-ballot triggered by a decision of HE officers.

HEC members then wrote to call for a second meeting to enact the ballot, but – unlike now – nothing was called for six weeks. At the second meeting of the HEC, on the 14th of August, two key decisions were taken, informed by the Branch Delegate Meeting a few days before. The first was to finally enact the summer re-ballot as quickly as possible to reduce a gap between mandates that would expose members on the MAB (this was supported by a 98% BDM vote). The second was for five days of strike action before the end of the mandate.

At that meeting, supporters of the General Secretary proposed the motion for an e-survey on continuing the MAB. The results of the survey was a majority in favour of an immediate end to the MAB, but the majority of those actually on the boycott voted to continue until the end of the mandate. They did so, because they understood that an early end to the MAB would both undermine their heroic efforts to-date, and expose them to pressure to get marking done at one of the busiest times of the year. 

Now members are faced with considerable marking burdens and little protection from industrial action. What protection does exist is further weakened if these days of strike action did not take place.

We saw last year how strike action is open and collective, and builds confidence of activists. Everyone can take part on the same basis. Strike days can be a space in which we restore confidence in the union, build the re-ballot to meet the threshold and debate the lessons of the past year. Despite differences about precisely what steps to take next, there is a consensus across the union that we must not repeat the mistakes of the last year, and stand by democratic decisions of members. There is a growing realisation that we need to enact a serious strategy of indefinite strike action that can win.

The General Secretary likes to counterpose an agreed strategy won in debates and meetings of members with her putative Grand Strategy, which she envisages as something promoted top-down and bought into by members. But unions are not corporations, the GS is not a CEO, and a Grand Strategy without a thriving democracy is mere stage direction. Every plan changes in struggle because the employers change their strategy too. 

Democracy is the lifeblood of our union. If the union wishes to change tack with strikes, it should do so at a properly called Branch Delegate Meeting. 

UCU Left members will be putting the following motion at the HEC.

HEC Motion

The Branch Delegate Meeting on 11th August voted by a majority of 2:1 for five days of strike action at the beginning of autumn term before the expiry of the mandate.

HEC agrees that in the absence of a subsequent BDM or Special HE Sector Conference expressing a different view, it would be undemocratic for HEC to overturn the decision to call strike action on 14th August.

For a democratic campaigning union driving real change

I am Principal Lecturer in Criminology with over 30 years experience teaching at both pre- and post-92 universities. I am Branch Co-Chair at the University of Greenwich UCU and HE Secretary UCU London Region.  

I’m a long-time member of UCU, but it was the experience acting as Department Rep before, and running a picket line during, the last dispute that made me step up and actively promote the union. It is my intention to do as much as I can to strengthen our union and build democracy in what is undoubtedly a very challenging time. Locally we fought hard to protect our members with the pivot to online delivery, making our employers provide a safe working environment, and now challenging a new workload system and low London weighting. Unions can make a difference. 

I have always volunteered alongside my teaching and research most recently elected to the board of Amnesty International UK, supporting a local migrants anti-raid network, and working with The International Coalition to End Transplant Abuse in China (ETAC) but previously for over ten years with the Fédération Internationale des ligues des Droits de l’Homme (FIDH), an international human rights organisation, against the death penalty worldwide and against terrorism.  

Union Activism 

This activism, I believe, coupled with my research interests around critical pedagogy, social justice and the impact of neoliberalism in the criminal justice system complement my approach to union activism in universities.  

I believe that UCU is only as strong as its members. We need to get organised to face the challenges together; fighting for a real-terms pay rise, for equality, against casualisation and against ever increasing workloads that dehumanise us, put colleagues under intolerable pressure, imperil our physical and mental health, and degrade university education for all. 

I am a member of UCU Left, and am active in the UCU Solidarity Movement. The principles of solidarity demand we work together, listen to all and build a strong member-led union of volunteer activists defending our collective rights for a free public higher education system rather than a marketised, exploitative system driven by a competitive, financialised management culture.

Driving Real Change 

I ask you to elect me to your NEC so that I can speak for you. This industrial action, ASOS and MAB has not worked but it must. We need clear communications for the central union leadership, a better, collectively agreed strategy, which is then stuck to, prepared for well in advance with rep training and adequate financial support. No more pauses, suspension of action, gaps which demoralise and leave MABing members facing bullying and marking for free all whilst some branches continue to face job losses and punishing salary deductions. This is not good enough. Let me represent you on NEC, fight for the HE sector we want, defend your terms and conditions, our academic freedom and our professional integrity. We must embody the values that we stand for namely equality, anti-racism, and fairness. These should be reflected in the way we speak and act, driving real change for all members.  

I also need to mention our students and the wider community we support through our teaching, research and tutoring. This is all at threat like never before, brutally evidenced through austerity, Brexit, pandemic, cost of living and planetary existential catastrophe. We must work with our students, other trade unions and local communities to tackle these threats and build a worthwhile education system. 

• Click here to listen to me talk about the issues.
• Click here to download my leaflet.