Strong show on the picket at the Blenheim Walk site of Leeds College of Art today. The Leeds College of Art UCU branch was to participate in the third national UCU 2 hour strike but as management insists on docking a whole day's pay for a 2 hour strike, the branch voted to strike for a whole day today.
Towards the end of the two hour strike, both the Leeds Met and Leeds Uni UCU branches came to join our picket and to hand a letter to the college principal in protest against the docking of a full day's pay for 2 hours strikes. A fantastic show of solidarity. Many thanks to everyone who came over to join us.
The UCU’s action is about fairness, equality and defending public higher education, say Tom Hickey and John Holmwood. (Read the article on the Times Higher Education website here.)
We are at a pivotal moment for higher education, facing a political and moral challenge that concerns us all.
The campaign for fair pay, which has seen a series of two-hour strikes in recent weeks, has been met with a clear drive by the Universities and Colleges Employers Association to intimidate staff into submission.
Its aim, as always, is to marginalise trade union influence.
But to understand what is happening fully, we must look at the context for this battle: the fundamental changes to the funding of higher education, which in the past four years have in effect removed universities from the public sector.
Most recently, the decision by the chancellor, George Osborne, to remove the cap on student numbers, and the abolition of the cap on tuition fees that many believe is coming, constitute the culmination of the policy to impose the market as the central regulator of higher education provision in this country.
They also firmly reinforce the idea that education is a commodity to be bought and sold – a commodity that is rationed by price, the value of which is measured by such things as the “graduate premium” (the extra income graduates are promised in return for their “investment” in their own “human capital”).
But this commercialisation of process is merely paving the way, both materially and ideologically, for the privatisation of our universities and colleges.
The government’s long-term goal is clear: to split our sector into two. One branch would be formed of “elite” institutions catering for an international clientele (as well as some home students, primarily from advantaged backgrounds) willing to pay tuition fees of up to £30,000 a year; the other would be a residual sector offering the local UK population cut-price degrees, and its staff would be on worse terms and conditions – terms set by local bargaining arrangements.
For institutions that prove not to be commercially viable in this confected market, there is the prospect of transfer to the for‑profit sector as they are bought by private providers, a process facilitated by a change in their charters and an alteration to their legal status and accountability.
These developments are not mutually independent.
If cutting staff costs by lowering pension liabilities was one condition for enhancing the market viability of universities (an objective now largely achieved without significant resistance), a defeat for the collective resistance of the trade unions is of equal importance to those whose goal is to split the sector.
That is the context that underpins the determination of Ucea and its affiliated universities to use the threat of “partial performance” against staff taking part in industrial action to deter unions from employing effective tactics, and thus to deflate any hope of collective resistance to the wider agenda. The docking of a full day’s pay for two-hour strikes makes this strategy clear.
When we talk about the current pay campaign, then, it is vital that we keep this wider context in mind.
Of course the campaign is about fair pay, and about mobilising the combined strength of higher education staff to support those at the bottom of the grade structure.
But it is also about fighting a battle that can be won, thereby giving us all the confidence to commit to a wider struggle to preserve higher education as an experience open to all who can benefit from it, irrespective of their wealth or background.
That is the reality. It is also the hope of most members of the University and College Union that in fighting over salaries and conditions, the union will also come to be seen as the champion of public universities, and thus of equality.
The pay campaign is not, therefore, just about “fairness” in remuneration, or about opposition to the dramatic inequalities within institutions. It is not just about revulsion at the salaries enjoyed by the chief executives of universities (and the 5 per cent average increases on those salaries last year).
It is also about equality in a much wider sense. It is about having the confidence, the determination and the organisation to fight for the kind of education that we want for future generations. That is what is at stake in this campaign.
The chief executives of our universities know this. Do we? And are we prepared to do what is necessary to win?
At least 11 universities threatening to dock day's pay from any staff taking part in two-hour lunchtime walkout. Martin WilliamsGuardian Professional,
University bosses have been accused of "penny-pinching and bullying", in a dispute over a strike by academics.
Across the country, thousands of lecturers are set to walk out for two hours
on Thursday 23 January, over a pay dispute. But at least 11
universities have told staff that they will have their pay docked for
the entire day if they go on strike.
In an email, seen by the
Guardian, one university said that going on strike was a breach of
staff's employment contracts. Although the strike is only set to last
for two hours at lunch time, university bosses told academics that they
should leave for a whole day, if they wanted to strike.
The email
said: "If you take two-hour strike action but perform your normal duties
during the rest of the day, those services you do provide on the strike
day whether in the university, at home or elsewhere, will be voluntary
and at your discretion and you will not be paid."
The University
and College Union (UCU) said the universities threatening to dock pay,
include: Nottingham Trent University, University of Chester, University
of Dundee, Oxford Brookes University, Glasgow Caledonian University,
University of Leicester, De Montfort University, Staffordshire
University, University of Wolverhampton, University of Surrey and Leeds
College of Art.
The union has threatened legal action against any
universities that withhold an entire day's pay from staff. It said
university bosses had a "baffling willingness to increase disruption for
students as a way of intimidating staff."
The "lock out" is the
first of its kind by universities in recent strikes, and lecturers say
it represents a escalation in their dispute with employers.
One
academic who is planning to strike, and asked to remain anonymous, said:
"This is clearly designed to be intimidating, but we are not going to
be intimidated because what we are doing is legal. Any attempt by the
university to lock staff out would be unlawful.
"The disruption to
students from our strike would have been minimal, but the university is
now increasing that many times over. Instead of just two hours, a full
day of teaching is now going to be wiped out for students. They are
turning people against them."
She added: "Not only are they
increasing support for strike action, they are making a mockery of the
university right across the world."
The union has threatened to
escalate its industrial action if the university deprives striking
lectures of a full day of pay. UCU general secretary Sally Hunt said:
"UCU's legal advice is that a two hour strike should lead to the
deduction of two hours pay – no more or less."
She added: "Any
university that tries to dock a full day's pay for a two-hour walkout
will face a legal challenge from us and an escalation of strike action,
as well as risking considerable damage to their reputation for fair
play."
The two hour walk out follows strikes by academics and support staff in October and December
over a "miserly" 1% pay increase for rank-and-file university staff.
UCU says that the pay offer means academics across the UK faced a 13%
pay cut in real terms since October 2008.
However,
the Universities and Colleges Employers' Association have supported the
docking of pay, saying that universities are doing their best to help
students.
A UCEA spokesperson said: "The unions are fully aware of
the employers' consistent position regarding withholding pay for
partial performance, and that they are entitled to withhold a full day's
pay if staff do not work normally.
"It is disingenuous for UCU to
suggest that the employer should be blamed for any further disruption
they may call on their members to cause."
One of the universities
that has threatened to dock pay for staff, stood by its warning.
Leicester University said: "We do not accept that staff should pick and
choose the duties which they are prepared to perform, in a way which is
deliberately targeted to cause maximum harm to this institution and the
education of our students, without recourse from their employer."
However,
the National Union of Students (NUS) has urged universities to
negotiate. NUS president, Toni Pearce, said: "It's clear that the
continuing pay dispute, over the measly pay offer to staff made by
vice-chancellors who are receiving pay raises of 8%, now risks causing
significant disruption."
She added: "Students want a speedy
resolution. We need to see the employers and unions getting round the
table and negotiating a fair and sustainable pay settlement."
