Transcript What has gone wrong? Why are compulsory redundancies back

Defend Jobs, Defend Education
Compulsory redundancies - on the agenda
Strike to Defend your Pensions, Pay, Jobs and
Colleagues
Report by Malcolm Povey for UCU EGM 10th March
2011
USS Ballot Result

Members in more than sixty institutions have agreed to
support both strike action and action short of a strike in
order to defend USS pension rights. The ballot was
disaggregated by institution but if the results are taken
together a total of 64.55% of those who voted have
supported strike action while 82.19% supported action short
of a strike. Overall turnout across all the institutions within
the very short balloting period was 36.32%.
The USS negotiators remain fully committed to reaching a
negotiated solution if only the employers will show some
willing to engage with us. The employers have refused ACAS
involvement so far.
 National Strike Days so far announced – Tuesday
March 22nd and Thursday March 24th.
Job Security and Pay National Pay
Dispute
Members have voted to take strike action
and in favour of action short of a strike in
the ballot on the 2010 annual claim. Overall
52.62% of those who voted supported
strike action while 73.53% supported action
short of a strike. The turnout was 34%,
again during a very short balloting period.
National Strike Day over Job Security
and Pay on March 24th.
Report from National Negotiators

Gavin Reid
Local Dispute

Overall 50.6% of members at the
University of Leeds who voted supported
strike action while 66.9% supported
action short of a strike. The turnout was
46.3%.
Decision of the UCU General
Meeting of November 9th 2010

“The LA notes proposals carried in Senate to restructure the Centre for
Joint Honours (CJH).The paper contains no proposals for how the higher
level administrative functions of the Centre are to be carried out.The
obvious conclusion is that the work will simply be dumped on already
overstretched staff in the Schools, while our members will be displaced
from their jobs. The LA has twice requested further information from
University management in the ESRG about this but the proposal to
restructure was taken to Senate regardless of our concerns. The LA does
not believe that there is a diminishing need for these jobs, for the most
part Joint Honours programmes will continue to be delivered; current and
prospective students will still need to be looked after.The LA calls on
university management to redeploy our members into the relevant
Schools. The LA resolves should this not happen that our members will
not pick up the work of our colleagues in the CJH. Should the university
management move to make our members redundant in CJH or any
other part of the University, the LA will ballot for industrial action.”
November Section 188 Letter
The Notice of Redundancy was issued before
the offer of MIS/PRT terms, contrary to our
agrement.
We are back to where we were last year.
What does the UCU want on behalf
of its members?






The UCU has never said ‘No redundancies ever’.
There is no case for redundancies in the current
reviews.
Placement of all staff displaced during restructuring
into posts at least of the same grade
Agreement and implementation of the School
Constitutions which we agreed last March with the
university and which are essential for proper
consultation, collegiality and academic freedom
Abandonment of ‘Academic Activity Profiles’
Removal from the review process of Physics,
Chemistry, English, Student Services, School of
Modern Languages and Cultures and Humanities
Agreement regarding fixed-term contract staff.
Is a negotiated solution possible?
 You
can be assured that UCU is
engaging seriously with the university
to reach a negotiated solution. Our
priority is to protect members’ jobs
without having to take industrial
action if possible.
 We have taken up the VCs offer of
high level talks without preconditions.
School constitutions Management revising the draft model
constitution and will let UCU have the
next draft by the end of this week.
 Further meeting of the governance subgroup as soon as possible to discuss that
draft. Aim to put an agreed draft to the
Senate for approval in May.

Fixed-term contracts
The UCU’s comments on the proposed
arrangements for the management of
fixed-term contract will be discussed at a
meeting of the ESRG’s sub-group (a
meeting which has already been
arranged).
 The UCU side will let the University have
comments in writing ahead of that
meeting.

FBS and CJH
FBS is at Stage 4 of the organisational change process. Both
sides are agreed that, to provide clarity for the staff
concerned, we need to complete that stage as soon as
possible, consistent with ensuring that the process is
thorough and conducted properly. UCU concerns about
the fairness of the process have been drawn to the attention
of the management side, and we will arrange a meeting with
you soon – we will try for next week – to explore and
respond to those concerns. I will need to confirm with you
who should represent UCU in this meeting.
 CJH is just entering Stage 4, and discussions are under way
with individuals who do not have a role in the new
structure. UCU will be kept abreast of any developments.

University failure to honour
agreement on FBS
Faculty of Biological Sciences
10.
A separate agreement to facilitate an enhanced post-restructuring review for the
Faculty of Biological Sciences has been reached (Attachment B)
11.
In addition to the provisions of that agreement and to ensure new roles are allocated
through a formal, competitive and transparent advertisement process with clear job
descriptions and person specifications, the following is agreed:


That there will be an immediate review of all job descriptions which will include
comparing the generic elements of the job descriptions against the set of descriptions
agreed for the purposes of implementing the Framework Agreement and ensuring equal
pay. This review will be completed by 12 April 2010.
That the existing matching process for academic staff will be discussed further between
the University and UCU, and any changes agreed by 19 April.
UCU accepts that recorded expressions of interest remain valid.
12.
In order to maximise opportunities for the redeployment of academic staff, the
following measures are agreed (the idea being that this will serve as a pilot to assess
feasibility and practicability) :o
The options to be discussed in the individual meetings with staff ‘at risk’ (see
4.1 of Attachment B) will include the possibility of relieving them of workload
to allow for intensive re-training or work on re-establishing or strengthening
research profile. Where appropriate this may include, in addition to the
allocation of time, the support of a mentor to work on bringing research to
publication and on making grant submissions (to a deadline of 1 October
2010).
o
Grant submissions will be subject to the internal peer review process as
normal. In order for staff to reinvigorate their research profile, it is expected
that the grant submission will support a significant proportion of the individual
academic’s time.
The options discussed with the individual will also include secondment onto appropriate
courses delivered in the University to allow the updating of skills relevant to research and the
offer of subsidised places on postgraduate courses offered by the University
Academic activity profiles
UCU yesterday explained its concern about
the potential link between the publication
of academic activity profiles and the
selection of staff for redundancy.
Management agreed to convene a meeting
soon to discuss ways of addressing UCU’s
concerns.
Number and prioritisation of
reviews


Management will come back to UCU soon,
as discussed in the last JCUU, with some
thoughts about the prioritisation of reviews
and will try to arrange things so that the
matter can be discussed at the same time as
FBS and academic activity profiles.
The UCU pointed out that the new RAM
changed the context within which all reviews
were operating and that a ‘transparent’
financial model was required.
Review of the March 2010
agreement
The University side will meet in London
on 28 March to review the agreement
reached last March.
 The University will write separately to
Michael MacNeil’s office about the
logistics and timing.

Where does this leave us?
We now have the legal right to strike in
defence of jobs at Leeds.
 We have made more progress in
negotiations in the last three weeks than
in the past three months.
 The university says it wants to ‘avoid
redundancies if at all possible’, we need
to keep the possibility of strike action in
defence of our colleagues open, until they
have all been given jobs

Meetings
Governance sub-group’, involving Malcolm
Povey, Gavin Reid, Steve Scott and Roger
Gair
 A ‘compound meeting’, with a bigger cast
of characters (probably varying as we
move from one topic to another) to
discuss FBS, profiles and the prioritisation
of reviews.

Joint Statement

The University and UCU met on 9 March
to discuss the points at dispute between
the two sides. The meeting was
constructive, and a series of further
meetings is being scheduled to work
towards a resolution of the dispute.
Recommended next steps
‘All out’ National strike action in Defence
of Pensions, Job Security and Pay on 22nd
March and 24th March.
 ‘Activate’ our local strike ballot by taking
strike action on 24th March alongside the
National Strikes, minimising disruption to
students.
 Keep ASOS in reserve ( we might want to
withdraw from SRDS, the university may
well threaten pay docking.)

Calendar
◦ National Strike Day over Pensions – March
22nd
◦ National Strike Day over Pensions, Job
Security and Pay – March 24th
◦ TUC National Demonstration – 26th March
◦ Contact [email protected] for transport
details.