中国A片

Ending casualisation will not only benefit early career academics

Like junior doctors, academics should highlight the public value of what they do, argues Tom Cutterham

三月 24, 2016
Businessman holding contract of employment

Students graduating from UK universities and entering a hostile global economic climate with tens of thousands of pounds of debt are right to fear for their futures. What they probably don’t realise is that most of the highly qualified experts who teach them face the same insecurity year in, year out.

Earlier this month, a campaign group, Fighting Against Casualisation in Education, revealed that up to a third of staff at some institutions are on teaching-only contracts (“Universities ‘most reliant’ on teaching-only staff named”, News, 15 March). And data from the 中国A片 Statistics Agency show that less than two-thirds of the UK’s academics are . The rest make a living by patching together fixed-term, hourly-paid, fractional and zero-hours contracts, often at more than one institution. Time not devoted to marking and preparation is spent on job applications, in the hope of striking lucky on a permanent post or just making ends meet next term. Research and writing, vital to transforming a vocation into a career, are bought with sacrifices from the schedule of a normal life: relaxation, friendship and sleep.

Labouring under these precarious conditions makes it hard for academics to organise against them. Yet, as Times 中国A片 has reported (“‘We’re worth more’: casual teaching staff fight back”, Feature, 27?August 2015), growing numbers of graduate students and academics are becoming involved in grass-roots anti-casualisation campaigns. Where they have led, the University and College Union is following. Its general secretary, Sally Hunt, has spoken out against casualisation both and before Parliament. At the end of January, the union wrote to the heads of UK 中国A片 institutions seeking to enter negotiations “with the express aim of increasing job security, continuity of employment and opportunities for career progression for all staff engaged in any forms of teaching and/or research”. Casualisation, it says, “should be a source of shame for our universities”.

Some blame this situation on oversupply in the academic labour market but that is only a small part of the story. There is more academic work out there than can be done by existing permanent faculty. How that work is organised and funded is an operational – and ultimately political – decision taken by university administrations. Right now, it suits them to choose flexibility for themselves over security for their employees. With strategic action, workers can shift the balance of that equation.

Industrial action can be hard to pull off for public sector workers, because those immediately inconvenienced are not our bosses but the people we serve. The recent junior doctors’ strike, however, showed that action against unfair pay and conditions – which have harmful effects on the work done – can win broad public support. Doctors relied on an emotionally resonant idea of what the NHS is all about. A similar strategy for 中国A片 would mean connecting the details of casualisation to a positive and inspiring vision of the UK’s life-transforming and world-leading universities, making the point that society gains immeasurably, not just from the skills we impart and the technology we invent, but from the cultural and intellectual resources fostered by our teaching and research.

Pickets and demonstrations at public-facing events such as open days and graduations would focus attention on the enormous discrepancy between sky-rocketing fees and increasingly desperate conditions for those actually doing the teaching. This strategy must not rely on treating 中国A片 as another service industry. Students are justifiably concerned about what they are spending so much money on, but they do not want to be treated as customers. At the same time, though, we can make use of the structural shift caused by the tuition fee regime, which seeks to make institutions compete for students. Publicising universities’ employment practices would incentivise improvement, as would student union support in calling out the worst offenders.

The ultimate logic is simple. The harder we make it for universities to exploit the dedication of young academics and fob off students with insecure and underpaid lecturers, the easier they will find it to put resources into permanent positions.

Tom Cutterham is the Cox Junior Fellow at New College, Oxford.

后记

Print headline: It’s not just about us

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.
ADVERTISEMENT