USS TIME TO FIGHT

NO DETRIMENT means No Detriment

Twelve months ago our historic strike saved the USS pension scheme in pre-92 universities from employers and pension scheme managers intent on destroying the retirement of UCU members. The union grew at a record rate and transformed our union. This success was underpinned by a widespread recognition that the problem with the USS pension scheme lay with the management of the notional valuation not the scheme itself. This culminated in a Joint Expert Panel (JEP) report that demolished the rationale underpinning the USS’s own approach to valuing the scheme. There is now a recognition running from the Financial Times journalist Jo Cumbo through to UCU Left that the USS pension scheme is not in deficit and is sustainable in the long term.

UCU’s position since the strike began has consistently been for No Detriment. This means no cuts in benefits nor increases in contributions.

However, rather than accepting this widespread consensus USS executive have sought to undermine the JEP and create instability in the scheme, ultimately as a basis for returning to their proposals for ending the Defined Benefit scheme.

As a result we are currently in the middle of a colossal sell-out over USS. The USS Board is attempting to push high contributions onto employers and employees, as announced in the USS letter to members of early March.

USS will blame delays in negotiations, but the root of the problem is the same as before: USS’s insistence on ‘de-risking’ the pension scheme and thereby deflating asset projections, and creating large future liabilities that the assets won’t cover. In other words this is an avoidable disaster.

But so far UCU is doing nothing to alert members to it. Instead UCU is silent on the increased contributions that started from April 2019 and hoping members will accept increased contribution rates.

As of 1st April 2019, all members of USS are now paying 10% more into the fund. From 1st October, USS is planning for all USS members to pay in another 20%. And from next April, a further 12.5%. All for the same pension benefits.

If we do nothing, we will be paying 42.5% more on 1^st May 2020 as we did on March 2018. These figures might vary as a result of ‘negotiations’ over contingent contributions but unless we can create a political and industrial crisis by taking industrial action, the outcome will be broadly the same.

But this is just the start. The employers’ contributions will also go up substantially – far in excess of the contributions they have said they are willing to pay. If UCU sits back, we can expect the employers to quickly resume lobbying for Defined Contribution. 2019 will be like 2017 all over again. And our members will feel they went on strike for nothing. Worse, with the “option” of paying 42.5% more for Defined Benefit being equally unappetising, it will be much harder to stop DC.

The right of the union are hoping that the employers will somehow stop USS from imposing these cuts. They will talk up unity with UUK and hoping UUK may bring legal action against USS. But UUK’s action is only to save UUK members not us as members of the USS scheme. Quite the opposite UUK wish any increases arising from contingent contributions to be cost shared ensuring they offload 35% of any increased contributions onto us.

Let’s be clear increasing member contribution rates leaves our members unable to afford a defined benefit pension resulting in only a cheaper and inferior defined contribution pension being available. This is not wild speculation rather it is the advice of the industrial relations lawyers Pinsett Mason who have advised killing defined benefit by a thousand cuts if one big change cannot be achieved.

WHAT WE NEED TO DO

We need to trigger a dispute and start a campaign among branches to prepare them for a ballot. Our argument has to be that any increases represent taking USS into territory that could destroy it, and that when members voted to suspend the dispute for the JEP it was not on the basis of paying substantially more into USS – especially once the JEP has shown such contribution increases to be unnecessary.

It is also clear that we need to campaign amongst members to convince them that UCU is going to fight over USS again, and not allow USS and UUK to impose outrageous contributions on members or trigger the dismembering of the scheme as it becomes too expensive.

I have launched a petition which members need to sign and share.

https://www.ipetitions.com/petition/defend-uss-no-detriment

Lambeth College votes to continue the strike!

**Breaking News**

Lambeth College UCU members last night voted to reject the offer made by college management.

Members at Lambeth have had no real pay rise for a decade. They’ve taken part in all the waves of the successful rolling strike action that FE has adopted and which has seen magnificent wins at CCCG and Hugh Baird Colleges, with other colleges also now being forced into negotiations by huge turnouts and votes for action over pay.

I stood with Lambeth College strikers on their last picket lines. I joined them in their (very appropriate) chant, ‘The money’s there, we want our share!’

It is totally unacceptable that after suffering a real terms pay cut for ten years members are now being offered only 1.5% for this year. Especially after their recent merger with London South Bank University meant that the government has written off their debt!

I send my solidarity to all of the colleges striking over pay next week and encourage everyone to send donations where possible, messages of support privately and publicly on social media and visit picket lines. Let’s pull together to raise the profile of this campaign!

It’s an absolute disgrace that FE has been run into the ground for so long and that staff have had to suffer stagnated pay for as long as a decade in places like Lambeth.

If I am elected as General Secretary I will fight to stop the rot and ensure that FE is given the value it deserves by ensuring that members pay is a priority.

I will make sure that FE members have a strong, equal voice in our union and are not sidelined and marginalised as they are by employers and the government.

I’m here today because of FE. I know how important education for all is for our society. I work in Widening Participation and Fair Access so I know first hand how vitally important FE is to the much needed diversity of the student body in HE. I don’t think members in HE realize just how much we rely on our colleagues in FE to help enrich our universities with their students.

Please do what you can to support.

Here’s a list of the striking colleges:

UCU General Secretary Election

I would like to congratulate everyone who stood in this year’s election and to all those who won seats on the UCU NEC. I would especially like to congratulate Vicky Blake in winning the Vice President’s position. Vicky will work hard and will serve our members well and I look forward to working with her in the future. Finally I would like to congratulate Carlo Morelli for winning the UCU President position in Scotland. Carlo is a tireless activist who I know will be a real asset to Scottish members.

It is clear that the post-sixteen education sector faces enormous challenges. In Further, Adult and Prison Education we face the consequences of budgets that have been cut by 40% in the last five years. In Higher Education we face the rampant increase of marketisation, cuts in pay and pensions, job losses and our professional autonomy under attack.  

It will take more campaigns like the one we participated in over USS and the one we are seeing at the moment in FE, if we are to be able turn back the tide of regressive education policies and funding deficits.

I believe we can do this. But it will take a leadership that understands industrial tactics and not only supports effective action but one that that is prepared to see these fights through to victory.

This is why I will be putting myself forward for the position of GeneralSecretary of UCU. 

We need a genuine grassroots candidate who is not tainted by the mistakes of the past. I ran against Sally Hunt two years ago and won 41% of the vote, I ran on a platform of change and that change is now needed more than ever. With one current paid official already standing, we now need a candidate who is not disconnected from our membership, will always be accountable to members and someone who will step up and transform UCU.

Finally, I would like to thank all those who voted for me in the VP election. The combined vote for the left was 64%. A united campaign around one left candidate would have a good chance of success in this new election. I believe I am that candidate.

In solidarity 

Jo 

Angela Rayner says ‘REF is not fit for purpose’ and HEC calls to abolish.

On Friday February 15th I took this motion to HEC:

REF

HEC notes

1.      The publication of the REF Guidance, in particular the eligibility of outputs from previously employed staff

2.      The requirement to include all category A staff once they have one eligible output

3.      Previously REF portability encouraged a transfer league of staff which exacerbated pay inequalities.

HEC believes

1.      The new guidance on portability puts staff at risk of redundancy once outputs are published.

2.      The lower threshold for inclusion increases the risk of

(i) REF criteria being used for performance management purposes; and

(ii) the movement of staff from T&R to T&S contracts, undermining scholarship in universities.

HEC resolves

1.    To demand that outputs from staff made redundant by an institution are made ineligible.

2.      To campaign against the use of REF criteria for performance management.

3.      To campaign for T&S to have equal status with T&R.

4.      To campaign for the abolition of REF.

The motion was carried unanimously.

This motion solidifies UCU’s position on REF which is causing major detriment to the majority of academic members in HE.

My branch, the University of Liverpool, is currently in dispute over a local institutional Research Code of Practice. We are about to move into a live ballot after achieving a 58% turnout on an indicative ballot.

Our members have had enough. Subjective and anonymous internal assessments of REF outputs are being used to performance manage, harass and remove colleagues. Our members are suffering on a day to day basis jumping through the hoops these metrics have introduced.

On Saturday February 16th I attended UCU’s Cradle to Grave Conference in Manchester. Angela Rayner, Shadow Education Minister, gave an excellent keynote speech outlining the positives Corbyn’s National Education Service would have on our students and our members.

After her speech she took questions from the floor. I asked if Labour would support UCU’s campaign to abolish REF. Angela said that she knew REF was ‘not fit for purpose’ and said she would agree to work with us to change it.

This is not exactly an agreement from the Labour Party to abolish REF but it is the start of a conversation which acknowledges the inherent problems with this system. It’s a position we can work with and lobby towards strengthening as we move towards a General Election. We have to make the abolition of these metrics, REF along with TEF and KEF, part of Labour’s manifesto.

If I am elected as Vice President, I will make this a priority.

Reversing Casualisation

After spending several years on casualised contracts myself both in the HE sector and outside, I am determined to work to reverse casualisation for our members.

UCU has recently achieved some significant negotiating success in reversing casualisation. I’d like to praise these achievements, and also to take a longer-term look at the question of casualisation.

At the Open University, over 4,000 associate lecturers now have permanent employment, thanks to the work of union activists at the Open University. At the Capital City College Group, UCU not only won a 5% pay increase but also importantly, fractionalisation for hourly-paid staff. This victory came after eight days of strike action.

UCU Left activists were in the forefront of these struggles to reverse casualisation. Such gains are a product both of persistence in negotiating and the preparedness to take industrial action. They demonstrate that the presence of a trade union can make a real difference in the workplace, significantly improving the quality of people’s working lives. And they are good reasons to join a trade union for those who are not already members.

The Growth of Casualisation

Recent entrants to the post-16 education sector encounter a workforce subject to extensive casualisation of employment. It was not always like this. At one time most teaching in Further and Higher Education was done by full-time lecturers on permanent contracts. Hourly-paid part-time work was used for temporary gaps in staffing, such as the need for sickness cover.

In more recent times, especially since the removal of the former polytechnics from Local Authority support and control in 1992 and the Further Education Colleges in 1994, casualisation of the workforce has grown. Employers have become addicted to cheap labour. One good way of measuring the extent of casualisation in a college or university department is to add up the number of hours taught by hourly-paid part-time lecturers, divide by the average teaching hours of a full-time lecturer and calculate the number for full-time jobs that are missing. Looking at the issue this way it becomes clear that there should be several more substantive posts in each department than are currently available.

The Harm Done by Casualisation and the Benefits of Job Security

Casualisation is an issue for all members. The bargaining position of all of us is weakened if one section of the staff is super-exploited. We all have a trade union interest in reversing casualisation.

Casualisation is an equality issue, in a number of ways. Sometimes we find Black, female and disabled members are disproportionately employed on casualised contracts. Sometimes workers in some sectors of employment feel obliged to trade job security for more flexible working so they can fulfil family obligations. Moreover, the fundamental inequity is that casualised workers are sometimes doing the same work as those on more secure contracts, with less pay and other rewards.

Insecure working hurts workers in a number of ways. There are psychological stresses similar to long-term unemployment. Casualisation affects ability to plan life, buy somewhere to live, settle in a neighbourhood or form a family. Casualisation adversely affects career planning, because horizons becomes limited to getting a secure job. It can also undermine our sense of self-worth. It is harder to stand up for your employment rights or challenge bullying behaviour if you are on a temporary contract.

Permanent workers too are affected by casualisation. If permanent full-time jobs are replaced by temporary and part-time jobs, there are not enough staff to take on roles like year tutor, admissions tutor, course leader and other academic and management roles. Patterns of precarious working intensify the workloads of all staff. Sometimes members of a shrinking core workforce find themselves obliged to take on several admin jobs.

Conversely secure employment benefits students, employees, families, communities, colleges and universities. Students learn better with a secure teaching workforce. Employees can work better without the insecurity of redundancy hanging over them, together with the constant need to keep looking for the next job. The families of employees and the communities they live in benefit from the greater security and long-term planning that come with a permanent contract. Colleges and universities benefit from having a more stable workforce, fewer recruitment costs and the longer- term involvement which often comes with a permanent contract.

So, there are very good social and educational arguments for secure employment. It can be a building block of a decent and just society.

What Can Trade Unions Do?

Trade unions, however, do not exist merely to analyse the problems caused by casualisation. Our objective is to change the material conditions in which our members deliver education.

UCU has already achieved much in campaigning against casualisation. We have highlighted the extent of casualisation in our sector, explaining that we are in much the same league as the hotel and catering industry when it comes to casualisation. We have exposed the poverty experienced by workers in precarious employment.

UCU has made space in its structures for representatives of staff on casualised contracts. We have two reserved seats on our National Executive Committee for representatives of casualised staff. We have an annual conference for casualised staff and an Anti-Casualisation Committee. We encourage our branches to include a representative of casualised staff on their branch committee. In our recent pay and pensions disputes casualised staff have often been at the forefront of picketing and organising strike committees.

UCU has raised the issue of casualisation in lobbying MPs, in our publicity and campaigns and in a resolution to the 2015 World Congress of Education International. The culmination of these efforts it that we now understand the issue of casualisation as central to the tasks and challenges facing us as a trade union.

It is not enough however to campaign on casualisation and engage in imaginative actions to highlight the problem. We need to ensure this issue is consistently raised at the negotiating table. Reversing casualisation must be central to our industrial strategy. We need to prepare and mobilise our entire membership to take industrial action on this question, if it is necessary to achieve our negotiating objectives.

The negotiating victories at the Open University and the CCC Group are examples of how we can win locally on this issue. We should also continue to seek UK-wide agreements on this question. If it is possible in devolved administrations (Scotland, Wales) to make further headway in achieving
agreements to reverse casualisation we should also make the most of such opportunities for negotiation.

The Way Ahead

We should be mindful that at times in the past, e.g. the implementation of the National Pay Framework in the Post 92 sector, we achieved some worthwhile agreements which transferred casualised staff to more secure employment. Unfortunately, what we learned was that a few years later the employers had recruited new layers of casualised staff. This puts the union in the position of playing catch-up. Can we develop a better approach? Clearly, we should continue to pursue agreements for the conversion of existing casualised staff to more secure employment. We need to be aware, however, that agreements of the character of all casualised employees with 100 hours of teaching or more in a year transferring to permanent and more secure contracts can lead to a restriction of teaching hours in future to debar individuals from qualifying for transfer to a fractional contract.

One approach we should seriously consider is seeking negotiations about the staffing structure. This should be based on the premise that teaching is normally undertaken by full-time or fractional permanent staff. Any exceptions to this principle should be few and subject to a strict justification process. Of course, such agreements would not be easy to achieve. They would be denounced by employers as encroaching on their prerogatives. Nonetheless such an approach, which looks at the demand for teaching labour power, not just the conditions on which it is supplied, could be the basis for designing casualisation out of the post 16 education sector. We must argue vigorously that a good quality education service should be built on secure employment as the norm, not the misery of casualisation.

So, congratulations to UCU activists at CCCG and Open University. Let’s build on these successes, both by more local agreements to fractionalise casualised staff and by pushing for secure and permanent employment as the norm for university and college staffing.

Truth for Giulio Regeni

On February 4th I spoke at a seminar for the ‘Truth for Giulio Regeni’ campaign organized by the University of Cambridge UCU branch.

I spoke alongside Taher, an Egyptian doctor who had been imprisoned and tortured by the Sisi regime for his activism as a junior doctor.

Listening to Taher matter of factly describe the horror of people ‘being disappeared’, was traumatic. Sometimes these people return, sometimes dead bodies are found. Listening to Taher describe the torture methods the Egyptian authorities use – he made it clear he was not talking about beatings, they employ medieval methods of torture – made me wonder if the UUK delegation who visited Egypt last year had ever met someone like Taher who had personally suffered under this regime.

He told us that every year since the Arab Spring revolutions, the Egyptian police organise a sort of commemorative swoop of activists around the time of the anniversary. This is to serve as a constant reminder to anyone even thinking of considering revolt again.

Among those who are ‘disappeared’ are academics and students. Free speech, the core of academia, is problematic to the Egyptian authorities.

Giulio Regeni was one of these students. A Cambridge PhD student from Italy, he was out in Egypt conducting fieldwork for his research. He disappeared on January 25th 2016 and his tortured body was found just outside Cairo on February 2nd 2016. The Italian government have since named Egyptian agents as suspects in his murder.

For context, 12 UK institutions visited Egypt last year with a view to broker closer relationships with them. One of these was my own employer, the University of Liverpool. Our VC signed a memorandum of understanding which would allow core collaborative research with Egyptian academics – which we all support – but worryingly went on to agree to greater mobility to Egypt for our staff and students and the potential to open a University of Liverpool campus in Egypt.

At the University of Liverpool, we protested when a campus in Egypt was suggested. We knew what had happened to Giulio Regeni and we were highly concerned that profit, as opposed to the guaranteed safety of our staff and students, was at the heart of this deal. We contacted UCU colleagues at the University of Cambridge and worked with them to expose our concerns in the press. An open letter generated around 200 signatures from senior academics and others in a very short period of time. The letter was published in The Guardian.

Fortunately, after this level of publicity from our campaign, the University of Liverpool decided not to go ahead with an Egyptian campus.

However, we know other institutions in the UK are considering setting up campuses in Egypt.

Collective campaigning works. If your institution is considering sending staff or students to Egypt, contact me to discuss how you can consult with them on arranging additional safety measures or if necessary, stop them putting profit before people.

We do not want genuine, collaborative research with our Egyptian colleagues to end, if anything we need to work with them more to ensure their voices are heard outside of their own country. We also know some research requires fieldwork in Egypt and that should be possible too.

The main focus of the ‘Truth for Giulio Regeni’ campaign is to keep a spotlight on the atrocities that took place, and to ensure we are pushing institutions into developing additional safety measures for anyone who has to visit Egypt as part of their work/research.

However, under the current regime, we do not believe satellite campuses in Egypt are a good idea.

If you would like to get involved in the ‘Truth for Giulio Regeni’ campaign, contact me: jomcneill22@gmail.com.

USS Update

The next HEC (Higher Education Committee) meeting is on February 15th. After the USS JNC on Friday Feb 1st, it has become apparent that we need to reinforce our position on USS.

During the Special USS Higher Education Sector in November 2018, delegates confirmed UCU’s no detriment, no deficit policy and support for the JEP proposals. Conference also noted the interim valuation but resolved not to endorse the March 2018 valuation. 

Confidence in the JEP’s outcomes derive from its recognition that benefits could be maintained and contributions reduced.

The March 2018 valuation timetable includes a framework for benefit changes to be negotiated and UUK are actively discussing potential benefit changes as a means to reduce costs of provision.

UCU needs to reaffirm its commitment to no detriment and no deficit. We need to further reject any detrimental benefit changes and resolve to have no confidence in the interim valuation if potential benefit changes are not removed from the valuation planning.

We need to urgently demand UUK restate their support for JEP and criticise USS’s refusal to accept JEP recommendations.

I am a UK elected member of HEC, motions on USS will be discussed so contact me at jomcneill22@gmail.com before Friday February 15th to contribute to this much needed debate at HEC.

‘The money is there, we want our share!’ FE Fight Back.

All out for a pay rise – solidarity with all FE branches striking and balloting. 

UCU members in 14 Further Education colleges are going out on strike for 2 days starting on Tuesday January 29th. This is part of a second wave of action following strikes by the ‘Magnificent 6’ at the end of last year. 

Members are fighting for improved local pay and conditions and a 5% or £1500 pay rise.

These strikes come off the back of fantastic ballot results averaging a 50% turnout with massive Yes votes. 

Members have been spurred on by the recent CCCG win. A landmark deal which resulted in a 5% pay award, 50 casualised lecturers moved onto permanent contracts – worth on average £6k, as well as a plan to bring all outsourced staff in house.

Several colleges are in talks with local union branches trying to broker deals to head off further strikes. We should push as hard as we can to get the best we can. These union branches need our support and solidarity.

Momentum is building with more further education branches balloting to fight locally for better pay and conditions. They could join the action in March and throughout the summer term. 

FE funding has been savaged by austeri with a loss of around 2 million adult education places, and 25,000 teachers. Support staff are cut to the bone, additional support has been cut and workloads going through the roof. In real terms pay has been cut by 25%. 

The need for a pay rise has moved up the agenda. 

College Principals closed colleges last October to lobby Parliament following strikes in 13 colleges demanding more pay for staff. The lobby was supported by Jeremy Corbyn and opposition leaders, and attracted a great deal of well deserved press.

A petition launched by college students reached over 70,000 signatures. This prompted a Parliamentary debate last week. You can watch it here. 

We have finally begun to see widespread recognition of the academic vandalism suffered by this sector. 

Unfortunately despite all of this support, college leaders only offered a 1% pay rise at ‘national talks’. Even though many could afford to pay more. They are quick to say that their hands are tied because of government funding cuts and that they will keep lobbying for more funds. 

College leaders repeatedly say there is nothing they can do because there is no money. The truth is many can afford a pay rise but are simply choosing not to on the old fashioned notion that you need to keep staff wages down in order to be successful and competitive. 

This is the logic of the market at work and the dogma of 25 years of incorporation. A process that turned a democratically controlled public service for the community into academy style private businesses. It is now the norm for college leaders working in the poorest areas in the country to earn more than the Prime Minister. Then tell our members there is no money!

The CCCG deal is important. It was won through 8 days of well supported strike action which crucially, included the exam period. This highly significant win has greatly lifted staff morale. More importantly it is based on a new mode, one that makes more sense with inward investment in staff as crucial to sustain FE’s. This could lead that college into a faster recovery, positioning them for future investment post-Brexit, and hopefully, when a Labour government is elected to deliver on the National Education Service. 

What CCCG shows is that if the political will exists, then there is a financial model that supports staff. This is something every college can achieve. There is more than a £1bn sitting in college reserves and millions of tax payer and student fee money is leaving the sector as profit to consultants and private providers. 

The FE strikes will only grow. ‘The money is there, we want our share!’

#FEfightsback and #FEpay

https://www.ucu.org.uk/fefightingback

In the news…

London Live

https://www.londonlive.co.uk/news/2018-11-28/staff-strike-at-croydon-and-lambeth-college

BBC Radio 5 Live

BBC Points West

Solidarity and how we can build this growing movement:

Every university branch should invite an FE speaker to help GTVO 

Could your university or college branch twin with a striking college to offer support?

Hold a solidarity rally – This Tuesday at UCL UCU London region will host strikers from colleges alongside UNISON traffic wardens on strike in Camden. 

Please send solidarity messages and collections to the following branches:

Jeanie Donald-McKim

jeanniedonaldmckim@gmail.com

*Abingdon and Witney College

Stephanie Williams

stephanie.williams@bathcollege.ac.uk
Bath College

Geraint Evans

g.evans@bradfordcollege.ac.uk
Bradford College

Catherine Patay

patayc@bridgwater.ac.uk

Bridgwater and Taunton College

Adam Dwight

dwightadam@hotmail.com

City of Wolverhampton College

Margot Hill

hillm@croydon.ac.uk 
Croydon College

Abbie Jenkinson

abbie.jenkinson@sussexdowns.ac.uk

jwynne@sussexcoast.ac.uk

Justin Wynne
East Sussex College

Lydia Richards

pleggett@harlow-college.ac.uk

Harlow College

Judith Eland

Judith.eland@kendal.ac.uk
Kendal College

Mandy Brown

mandybrowncow@hotmail.com
Lambeth College

David Kill

dahill@leicestercollege.ac.uk 
Leicester College

Stewart Fraser
stewart.fraser@newcollege.ac.uk 

New College Swindon

Cecily Blyther

cecily.blyther@petroc.ac.uk

Petroc

patrick.mccann@west-thames.ac.uk 
West Thames College

UCU says: In order to maximise the impact of their action, Leicester College UCU members will be taking action on Tuesday 29 and Thursday 31 January. UCU members at Kendal College will be taking action on Wednesday 30 January and Tuesday 12 February.

Campaign for National Vice President 2019

Many of you will already know that I’m currently campaigning to be UCU’s next National Vice President from HE.

I’ve decided to re-open the wordpress blog I used during the General Secretary election campaign in 2017 with some amendments. Some of the blog posts are still relevant today so I’ve decided to leave them up. (see below)

I’m hoping to post regular updates from the campaign trail. So far this week I’ve attended three hustings in Dundee University, UCL and the London Regional Meeting. I also visited Strathclyde University where I spoke about pay and getting the vote out.

It’s a busy time right now, the pay ballot is open, if you have your postal ballot paper please vote YES to action and YES to action short of strike and please, most importantly, post your ballot paper! If you don’t have your ballot paper, contact UCU. We have to get that 50% turnout!

I hope members will read and share my posts and I hope you will vote for me in the upcoming NEC elections.

The election opens on February 1st and closes on March 1st. If you’d like me to speak in your branch or if you’d like to arrange a hustings, please email me on: jomcneill22@gmail.com

#VoteJo4VP

UCU General Secretary Election Result

Firstly, I’d like to congratulate Sally Hunt on being re-elected as General Secretary of UCU. I congratulated Sally personally this morning and we look forward to continuing to work together for all members.

To all those members who voted for me, thank you!  I really enjoyed meeting all members who came to hustings and hearing from all members who emailed me to discuss your concerns and what you think our union should be doing.

I’m pleased to see that I achieved 41% of the votes cast. This is a significant increase on the vote share gained by the challenger during the last GS election which was a commendable 27%.  The result illustrates that almost half of our active members in UCU want a change in leadership.

However, the turnout in this ballot is a major cause for concern.  Only 13.7% of UCU members participated in this ballot. It is unfortunate that the mandate for the re-elected General Secretary only comes from 8% of the overall membership.

We need to work hard to re-engage the disengaged. This is equally as important to us as recruitment. After meeting so many brilliant, committed members around the country, I have every confidence that we can work together to build UCU from below. It will take time and it will definitely take effort but if we want UCU to be seen as an active, organising, campaigning union, then we all have a part to play

We are living through difficult times, the equality agenda is under attack, the freedom of the press and workers’ rights.  We can take courage from the resistance that is already building up to Trump in the USA.   Like many other UCU activists I will be part of the resistance against racism, sexism and all forms of discrimination and hatred championed by the Alt-Right.  I’m looking forward to the big demonstration against racism in London on March 18th (there will be a coach leaving from Liverpool – contact me for details) and to the debate at UCU Congress in May about how we build our union.

Thank you!

Jo.