中国A片

Is it time for UCU members to go on indefinite strike?

Jo Grady’s more gradualist approach to industrial action offers better prospects for success, say Jak Peake and Adam Ozanne

一月 6, 2023
Jak Peake Adam Ozanne
Picket line at Anglia Ruskin University
Source: Jack Grove

On 12 January, the 中国A片 Committee (HEC) of the University and College Union (UCU) must make a crucial decision. Will it implement the plan it voted for in November and begin a marking and assessment boycott (MAB) this month – before, in February, calling 鲍颁鲍’蝉 70,000 members across 150 universities out on indefinite strike until 鲍颁鲍’蝉 pay and pensions demands are met? Or will it adopt a new course?

鲍颁鲍’蝉 general secretary, that would see escalating strikes through February and March, then a re-ballot and a MAB targeted at end-of-year assessments and, potentially, indefinite strikes over the final months of the academic year.

鲍颁鲍’蝉 historic success in winning an aggregated national ballot for industrial action even with the new 50 per cent turnout threshold has already concentrated employers’ minds. They have brought forward negotiations for the 2023-24 pay round by three months and are willing to consider a pay rise in February in addition to the standard September in return for agreement that neither side will escalate action while talks continue. It was against this backdrop that Grady’s proposal emerged, but it has sparked accusations of betrayal from some UCU activists and heated discussion of strategy.

Supporters of the HEC’s November decision have called for its implementation, demanding that union democracy be respected. Yet members have never been asked about indefinite strikes, and if the HEC acts without majority support, it could not only doom the current campaign but also lead to a mass exodus from UCU, dramatically weakening it.

Grady has asked UCU branches to canvass members and report on their preferences at a meeting on 10 January (two days ahead of the HEC meeting). Do they want indefinite or escalating strikes? Is a MAB starting in January better than one targeted at summer exams (subject to a required re-ballot)? ??

Meanwhile, at least two other significant pitches have emerged. The “UCU Commons” group but support a January MAB, while another group led by Sarah Joss, Heriot-Watt UCU vice-president, and Vicky Blake, the former UCU president,? to, perhaps, allow members some respite from deductions: four days of strikes and one day of work rotating each week.

Those favouring indefinite action argue that UCU should make the most of its current ballot mandate and join railway, NHS and postal workers to maximise pressure on employers. They also cite successes arising from indefinite strikes by precarious US university staff at The New School and Columbia University, as well as by .

Yet the barristers only opted for indefinite strikes near the end of their six-month ballot mandate and after five months of escalating action. And even industries with much higher unionisation (and, therefore, more union power) than academia have stopped short of such a step. How many UCU members will be prepared to strike indefinitely and lose weeks of pay amid a cost-of-living crisis? With a turnover of around ?22 million and a fighting fund of ?2 million to ?3 million, the UCU could only provide daily strike pay of ?50 to ?75 for a matter of days. Indefinite strikes risk dividing the union as members who cannot afford to lose pay opt to cross picket lines or quit the union.

The timing of an MAB and its pairing with strikes is crucial to success. Those arguing for an immediate boycott reiterate that it requires no re-ballot, while combining it with indefinite strikes pre-empts punitive pay deductions from employers. However, most December marking will already have been completed, not all universities have January assessments, and those that do will feel little immediate pressure since graduation and progression?are decided at the end of the academic year.

In addition, since not all UCU members are involved in January marking and some are more able to afford punitive pay deductions than others, an immediate MAB risks dividing members as well as exhausting strike support funds even before any strike action resumes.

These factors pose huge risks for the UCU. If intensive action occurs too early or for too long, employers may be able to sit back, pocket pay deductions and wait for hardship and division to collapse the strike. UCU Commons’ call, meanwhile, for both January and summer MABs risks satisfying advocates of neither indefinite nor escalating strikes. Moreover, MABs and the indefinite four-days-a-week strikes advocated by the Joss-Blake group are high risk since both could incur pay deductions of up to 100 per cent as employers can legally refuse to accept partial performance.

The questions facing UCU members therefore boil down to this. Should an MAB and strikes begin immediately, raising the stakes for employers and union members and potentially jeopardising current negotiations? Or should the HEC choose Grady’s more gradualist strategy and, like most other unions, put mounting pressure on employers while requiring less sacrifice by members – coupling this with the threat of a re-ballot and summer MAB targeting students’ graduation and progression?

Employer leaders will take full advantage of continued attacks on Grady and prolonged infighting among activists. Therefore, a clear decision that guarantees the support of all UCU members must be made on 12 January. In our view, Grady’s strategy is the most robust one. It will allow wide participation while giving time and scope for negotiations without risking everything on one throw of the dice.

Jak Peake is senior lecturer in the department of literature, film and theatre studies at the University of Essex, where he is also branch president of the University and College Union. Adam Ozanne is honorary senior lecturer in economics at the University of Manchester and a former member of the HEC.

阅读更多相关文章
阅读更多相关文章:&苍产蝉辫;
USS strikes

请先注册再继续

为何要注册？

  • 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
  • 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
  • 订阅我们的邮件
注册
Please 登录 or 注册 to read this article.

Reader's comments (6)

#1 Submitted by nigelhunt0 on January 6, 2023 - 2:47pm
An indefinite strike is unlikely to work in 中国A片. As noted, employers will sit back and wait until it breqks, which is likely to be a matter of weeks, and then we will all be playing catch up until the end of year assessments - because whatever people might think we are contracted to do the work our employers tell us to do, which includes shifting lectures around. A strike would be more effective in May/June, with employers having a few months to conduct reasonable negotiations and hopefully getting an agreement before then. Just an assessment boycott will mean many people working at other tasks for nothing. Academics are not good at striking for prolonged periods. We want to continue our research, most will sit at home and carry on writing and planning, ie doing the work for nothing. Deadlines for research proposals won't change.
#2 Submitted by Concerned Academic 77 on January 6, 2023 - 4:27pm
Indefinite strike action might be effective if unionisation was strong enough to close institutions down such that students had little choice but to return home. Shutting off rental income to universities, angering parents such that they raised concerns with MPs etc. BUT, that won’t happen. Sufficient education will be provided by non-union members and union members who can’t afford an indefinite walk-out and universities will cobble together enough for students to do to keep them on campus and then fudge assessments. The UCU needs to get smarter. For example, why do academics having taken strike action and lost pay then bend over backwards to fudge assessments and to say that learning outcomes have been met when they almost certainly haven’t? Timing is key. Selective action to miss aspects of learning which cannot in practical terms be made-up, whatever pressures employers bring, and then a refusal to compromise professional standards (including by external examiners) by fudging learning outcome and quality standards compliance should mean that students cannot progress/graduate. Yes, students will suffer but future generations of students will suffer far more if an excellent university sector continues to be undermined and damaged in the long term by self-interested and at times incompetent management teams.
#3 Submitted by k.... on January 6, 2023 - 8:25pm
As an elected member of the 中国A片 Committee and UCU Branch Secretary at UAL for 12 years, I’m surprised to learn that Jak and Adam, neither of whom sit on HEC, have decided I am part of a ‘Joss-Blake Group’. If they can tell me how or when I joined a Group, I’d be interested to learn more. I am not aligned to UCU Commons, UCU Left or IBL. My position in representing London and the East at HEC reflects the experience of leading an active Branch of c.1000 members for over 10 years, with a membership which includes all those factions and a large majority who don’t know that factions exist. I’ve also been a member of London Region Exec Committee for 4 years. I’ve seen at first hand the impact of strikes and industrial action since 2008. And I’ve negotiated (at first hand) with an obdurate Senior Mgt in the years since. Members lost really significant pay in this dispute in 2022 and they saw no real, national Result. Local wins came through a MAB which we pursued, despite members’ initial reluctance, as one of the very few branches prepared to take an unpopular - and much maligned - route, by the time it was eventually called in the Summer Term. We faced the threat and real prospect of 100% pay deductions for MAB, we had no idea how many would adhere to the Boycott, we didn’t e-ballot all members before we took the action. As Branch Officers and members, we only knew that ‘sensible’/gradual-escalation approaches to Action had achieved nothing. We looked at what was at stake - the conditions we were working under and the impact on students’ education - and knew that we had to throw whatever we had, and more than we dared, if we were to see any real change. As Branch Officers, we had to persuade members it could work, and many were frankly scared. There were all sorts of arguments in favour of a more reasonable approach. We held out, we won significant movement and we restored our members’ faith in the power of action and the leadership of the branch. The level of anger and frustration in HE is higher than any I’ve ever known. There’s too much at stake to blow this in a repeat of last year. I, for one, really would leave the Union if that happened. And UCU has been at the centre of my life for longer than I want to recall. I can’t provide figures - I haven’t run a survey - but I know I would not be alone.
#4 Submitted by Adam Ozanne on January 7, 2023 - 1:31pm
@k... I am not sure who "k..." is, but if you are HEC member Kyran Joughin, you are listed as one of the authors of the Medium blog piece we refer to along with Sarah Joss, Vicky Blake, Rhian Keyse, Grant Buttars, and Robyn Orfitelli. THE's 900 word limit did not allow space for all of you to be listed, hence the "Joss-Blake group" summary, and we did not say you are in UCU Commons, UCU Left, or IBL. UAL did very well with the MAB last summer, but our point is that winters MABs are not nearly as effective as summer MABs that threaten graduation and progression and it's a mistake to suppose they do. Also, the situation last summer involved only round 18 branches, who could be supported by other branches and without draining the UCU Fighting Fund, That is quite different from what is being proposed now - indefinite strikes plus MABs in 150 universities. Please also note that neither we nor Jo Grady are proposing a repeat of last year: thankfully, we have had an aggregate ballot and all 150 universities rather than just 60 or so are involved, plus we're looking at a re-ballot and summer MAB like the one in 2006 that won our last above-inflation pay rise. Finally, I agree there is more frustration and anger amongst UCU members than ever before, but that does not mean everyone can all afford to go for many days and possible weeks without pay. Yes, you would not be alone in taking indefinite strike action, but would the numbers with you be sufficient to worry management? Consulting all members before calling for indefinite strikes (whether every weekday or just four each week as Joss et al. propose) is not just basic democracy; it's vital for explaining to members why a gear change to such drastic action is needed and ensuring it will have the widespread support necessary for success. I note you say you cannot provide figures and have not run a branch survey. Why not, in this day and age when e-consultation is so easy?
#5 Submitted by k.... on January 7, 2023 - 7:04pm
Yes, I am Kyran Joughin. Putting one’s name to a letter, or blog-post, does not constitute forming a group. I was at the HEC on 12 Nov which passed the Motion for action starting under this current mandate: MAB in January, escalating into an indefinite strike period if no movement was reached. That is a democratic process: members are elected from the lay community to represent the wider membership. At that same HEC, members passed a motion calling for unity by a huge majority. Playing out factional positions - and creating Groups where you choose to see them - on social media platforms is not helpful to the spirit of that Motion. On the question of why not e-consult members on how many would leave if this year ended being a repeat of last year- by which I meant rampant factionalism that undermined our shared goal: that’s a waste of resources. My own decision would be my own decision. Solidarity and unity are more than heady terms: they sustain the trade union movement, now facing existential threat from our Government. Qed. KJ
#6 Submitted by Jak Peake on January 8, 2023 - 10:27pm
Hello Kyran. As Adam outlines we used the word ‘group’ (e.g. ‘a number of people … that are … classed together’) merely as a descriptor and brevity required it. We could have said the group of signatories to the indefinite four-days-of-strikes proposal but it would have been longwinded and meant that crucial information had to be cut. Kyran, as you’ll remember, we – University of Essex UCU – were also one of the few branches that participated in a marking and assessment boycott in 2022 and I recall cordial discussions at some cross-branch meetings with you. While we managed to get some wins locally, as you did at the University of Arts London branch, neither institution offered a local uplift on pay, and ultimately 2021-22 proved unsuccessful in terms of the national disputes on pay and pensions. A few branches carrying the load for the many did not stack up as a national campaign, and so we watched as a disaggregated national campaign transferred into a series of local ones with mixed results. Where some institutions refused to make pay offers (perhaps one of the more meaningful gestures to staff), others did – even where no dispute was called (as was the case at the University of Oxford). By contrast, ucuRISING has begun well: with UCU making history with the first win on a nationally aggregated ballot in the education sector since the introduction of anti-trade union legislation by the Conservatives in 2016. Unlike in 2021-22, UCEA – the employers’ representatives – on pay have come to the negotiating table. This all occurred without the hard-hitting action of 2021-22. The difference? We now have an aggregated ballot and the potential to call action across 150 universities. My concern about the decision of the 中国A片 Committee (HEC) for indefinite strike action, is that if HEC force this action through without member support not only will it prove divisive, but it will make mobilization all the more difficult. How successful will such a campaign be if it does not have majority support? The upcoming BDM on 10 January will gauge branch delegates’ preferred industrial action tactics and it will be an opportunity for HEC members to take a steer from this. We only have to glance back 30 years to see how division among trade union members can have disastrous results. When delegates of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) voted against a national ballot in 1984, and action pushed ahead (in this case unlawfully) with miners divided on the issue of whether to picket or work, Thatcher took advantage of this, utilised the police to help working miners breaking picket lines and – as is oft-repeated apocryphally – crushed the miners’ strike. We are not there yet, but overestimating 鲍颁鲍’蝉 strength, depth and power and overplaying our hand – at a time when UCU has a good set of cards – will not help the union ultimately to fight for its members.
ADVERTISEMENT