Strike 2020 - an update

In the fall, we blogged about what the union's demands are in the two disputes that are currently going on. I have excerpted the key demands from the older blogpost to refresh your memory
In other words, what exactly does UCU want to change?

Here is the concrete action UCU is asking for on each of the issues that the strike is about:

• Pensions: 'No detriment'. This means that any changes to the pension scheme should not result in higher costs to members, or in lower pension payments. University employees accepted cuts to the pension in 2011. In October 2011 future members of USS lost 65% of their pension wealth, equivalent to a reduction of roughly 11% in their total compensation. That is, in 2011 the total life-time pay for university employees was reduced by 11%. Now we are asking for no further reduction: We don't think this is asking for a lot!
• Casualisation: 'Stamp out casualisation.' UCU demands firm and measurable commitments reducing casualisation in higher education. Russel Group Universities have recently acknowledged that casualisation negatively impacts mental health, family planning, the research power of universities, and student learning. The problem of casualisation goes beyond teaching staff, and UCU are committed to ending the gig economy in higher education. Again, we don't think it's a lot to ask that staff at universities, where students are paying between £9250 and £34,660, should be entitled to benefits like sick pay and maternity leave. There are several blogposts on our blog (here and here) detailing some of the problem from personal experience. 
• Pay inequality: 'Equal pay for equal work.' What year is it? 1952? Oh no, wait, it's 2019 and women, people from BAME backgrounds and people with disabilities are still getting paid less than their white, male, able-bodied colleagues. UCU is calling for measurable commitments on this disgraceful inequality. UCEA is not willing to talk about pay. A personal view on this issue can be found here. 
• Unsustainable workloads: 'An end to occupational stress and bullying.' UCU wants all of the work we do - administrative, pastoral, teaching-related, supervisory, research-related - to be fairly counted, and for workloads to be managed in a fair way. The fact that universities including UCL are threatening to withhold 100% of pay for employees who are working to rule by working a standard 36.5 hour week demonstrates that they know it is impossible for us to complete our contracted tasks in that time. Our series of posts on What I would be doing if I weren't striking (here, here, and here) gives you a flavour. 
• Falling pay: 'A real-terms pay rise'. UCU is asking for a pay rise of RPI+3%, or a minimum increase of £3,349 (whichever is greater). This is to address the fact that, over the last decade, our pay has fallen by 20%. At the same time, average rents in London have risen by as much as 30%. But not everyone is worse off - university Vice-Chancellors' pay (including UCL Provost Michael Arthur) rose by 13% between 2009 and 2017. Students are paying more fees than ever - where is your money going? 

The main argument that UCU is putting forward is that there is a link between the disputes. In brief, the money to address the issues that don't have to do with pensions is there; universities have just chosen to pay that money into the pension fund. That probably sounds strange and non-sensical, so do read on.

The pensions scheme for university lecturers, the University Superannuation Scheme (USS), was set up as a defined benefit final salary scheme. 'Defined benefit' means that the payouts are guaranteed and set down in the rules of the scheme. 'Final salary' means that the guaranteed payouts are calculated as a percentage of an employee's salary just before they retire. In 2011 these rules were changed. For incomes up to £55,000 per year, the pension scheme remained a defined benefit scheme but the benefits were now calculated on the basis of the employee's average salary rather than their final salary. One's average salary over a lifetime is, of course, much lower than one's final salary. For salaries about £55,000 per year, USS was shifted to a defined contribution scheme, which means that employers and employees pay in a defined percentage of the salary but that what is paid out is not guaranteed but depends on how the investments made by USS perform. As mentioned above, this change amounted to an 11% cut in life-time compensation for new members of USS.

From the perspective of university staff, this massive cut in compensation was, of course, a bad thing. From the perspective of the universities, it was a good thing, as it reduced their potential liabilities: Pensions they would have to pay for were reduced and if USS investments underperformed, the shortfall would be to the detriment of the pensioners but would not create future costs and liabilities for the universities. In 2017, the universities argued for further changes in the pension scheme. The employers suggested to change the scheme completely from a defined benefits scheme to a defined contribution scheme. This change, employers claimed, was needed because a valuation of the scheme showed that it was in deficit. This valuation was widely criticised as flawed, including by the joint panel of experts set up by the union and the universities. However, that valuation has lead on October 1 2019 to an increase in contributions that employees and employers have to pay into the pension scheme for the moment (the employer contribution went up from 18% to 21.1% now with a planned increase to 23.7% in 2021). If the universities relented and pushed USS to accept a modified valuation of the scheme, then employer and employee contributions to the pension scheme could drop back. This would free up money that employers are currently paying into the pension fund. This money could be used to finance pay increases and to tackle the issues of pay inequality and casualisation.

It is the insistence of the employers on the negative valuation of USS that locks up the money that could be used to deal with the other issues. This insistence is rooted in the employers' aim of turning USS into a defined contribution scheme to the further detriment of employees. Universities need to start negotiate in good faith and in earnest on these issues and respect the recommendation of the Joint Expert Panel that was set up as a result of the strike in 2018.

As a result of our strike and student pressure, there appears to be some movement in the negotiations. It is important now to keep up the pressure. Please write to the provost again. and ask for UCL to push UUK and UCEA to table acceptable offers so that we can end this strike swiftly.

Strike - Spring 2020 - where we stand

Echoing something we said in the fall: We were hoping it wouldn't come this - but here we are. The University and College Union has called 14 days of strikes at 74 universities across the United Kingdom. That's up from 59 universities in the fall. You can read more about what this means for you, and how to support us elsewhere on the blog.

We are back fighting over the same four issues that were already at the heart of the strike in the fall:

• Pensions
• Pay
• Pay equality
• Working conditions and casualization

You can read about the issues on the blog here. Unfortunately, the employers' organisations have virtually not shifted their position on these issues. Despite the threat of strikes and in the knowledge of the disruption that strikes would bring to your education, the universities have refused to make a new offer to the union over pay and pensions. As a result, we are still faced with a pay offer below inflation - a de facto pay cut. We are still faced with a detrimental deal on our pensions. We are still faced with pay inequality for gender and race, with casualisation and worsening working conditions. 

Unless the universities shift their position quickly, this means that UCL will be on strike on the following dates:

• Monday Feb 24 to Wednesday Feb 26
• Monday March 2 to Thursday March 5
• Monday March 9 to Friday March 13
• Thursday March 19 to Friday March 20

We hope that you will support the strike, our cause, and that you will email the provost to record your support and your annoyance at the disruption to your education. You can use the union's template here. 

Back to reality + ASOS

After eight days of strike action, UCU members and supporters were back to work today. It was a day of mixed feelings.

 Firstly, we are still high on yesterday's joint action with IWGB, culminating in a march and rally:

(From @LionelOpenshaw)

Sometimes you just need to get your chant on!

Our hearts are also still glowing from all the support we saw from our students during the strike. You joined us at Strike School, you donated food and hot drinks to picketers, and you came to chat with us on the picket lines. We can't thank you enough!

We're also heartened that the universities are making some (barely perceptible) moves towards listening to us. They have agreed to talk about some of the issues, and we hope that these talks will be fruitful.

The bad news is that no measurable progress has been made towards ending casualisation, pay inequality, unsustainable workloads, and falling pay, and UUK seems to be moving ahead with their plans to increase our pension costs, with the likely result of putting the whole scheme at risk.

This means that our fight is not over. Now that the strike action is over, UCU are asking their members to engage in ASOS - no, not that ASOS! We mean Action Short of a Strike. A large component of ASOS is working to rule, also known as working to contract. This means following our contracts to the letter, but not undertaking any additional duties that fall outside our contracts. This might include not working for more hours than we are being paid for (the average lecturer works around 20 unpaid hours a week), not attending meetings where our attendance is voluntary, and not covering for colleagues who are absent or were on strike. UCU's guidance on what ASOS means for university staff can be found here. (It's worth pointing out that the questions discussed at that link give an indication of how vague and ill-defined many of our contracts are.)

During ASOS, we will continue to teach, research, complete marking, set assignments, and answer emails. But all of these tasks might take a bit longer, because we will only be doing them while we're being paid for them. Some universities, including UCL, have threatened to withhold 100% of pay for staff taking part in ASOS, which is a tacit acknowledgment that it is impossible for us to do our jobs to a satisfactory standard in the time we're being paid for.

It is also possible that further strike action will take place this academic year. This has not been decided on, and it very much depends on the actions of the employers in response to the issues we have raised. We will keep you updated here with any details as they emerge.

We will continue updating the blog from time to time, but less frequently than we did during the strike. If you have any issues you would like us to cover - any questions you'd like us to answer, any themes you'd like us to discuss, or any stories you'd like to share - please email them to us, or leave a comment.

See you in class!

Why support the strike? A student's view

We asked you to send us your stories of why you support the strike. Below we hear from one student who has seen the cost of their studies increase, while their value decreases. Remember: our working conditions are your learning conditions, so the changes we are fighting for will help students and staff alike.

Secure staff mean secure students

Early last year, in the final stretch of a BA, I came to campus early one morning to be confronted by a picket line across the main doors of my former university. Universities and Colleges Union members from across the country had voted for 14 days of strike action, to protest proposed changes to their pension by an upper management who, they felt, were aiming to shift the burden of pay from employer to employee. 

If this sounds familiar, it’s simply because it is. Fast forward a year and a half. I’m an MA student at UCL now, as well as a paid up member of UCU myself having taken a position at my former university, and there is a grim sense of deja vu about how the last few months have played out. Industrial action has been taking place in UK universities for almost two years now. And the infuriating thing is that in 2018, it worked. In April last year, Universities UK (who represent our universities) agreed to withdraw all the proposed changes, and an indepedent panel review was set up to bring the unions on board and construct a pension scheme which would satisfy all involved. But over the last year, those changes have been chipped away, bit by bit, until the dispute was back where it started. And now there are further concerns on the picket - the racial and gender inequality which has been totally unaddressed, an increasing reliance on fractional and casual work, the insane workloads.

So the question is : why should students care? It’s not our pensions, right? Well, at one point in history, universities were closer in shape to guilds. They were controlled by colleges, bodies of academics - both students and teachers and many who were both - who spent their time sharing knowledge. But that legacy has come perilously close to evaporating. Take my case. I’m a mature student; when I started school University tuition was free. When I first attended further education in 2010, it cost me £3,000 per year. The past four years have cost me £10,000 pounds each. My student debt is almost six figures once maintenance loans are factored in. Clearly, there is a hierarchy established here : as a student, I am less a member of a college now, and much more a consumer of a product. And yet, over these past years, the value of that tuition has plummeted. My previous faculty was a thriving research hub when I arrived. It has now been essentially dismantled, as it was not ‘profitable’. Less than half the staff who used to teach me remain at that university; they have left for greener pastures, for places where they can concentrate on their work rather than defending their existence. And all this has meant a total lack of morale on the part of remaining staff. I voted to strike this year. But anti-strike laws, which in Britain demand that unions reach a very high threshold of voting, have barred my workplace from taking part. People are just tired, fed up of fighting.

From my perspective, this is equal measures baffling and terrifying. On three fronts. Firstly, as a student, where is my money going? Where have they put the tens of thousands of pounds which I handed over? Secondly, as a fledgling academic, why would I want to sign up to a profession which so many seem to be fed up with? I want to work in academia because i love the subject; but if I have no time for the subject, then what is the point? And as an employee, why in hell would I want to sign up if my employers will refuse to see any value in my presence, and in fact will actively lie to meabout any kind of deeper engagement with my wellbeing?

This is why students should support the strike. Because our attendance is being slowly siphoned away from knowledge-sharing. Because the pensions and pay disputes are not distant unconcerning things. They are symptomatic of a wider lack of care in ‘the academy’ as to the value of its actual role (i.e., education and research). Our money is trickling more and more into obtuse procedural management; into shiny coffee tables and ‘open plan student mess rooms’; in short, it seems to be going into advertising. Universities in the United Kingdom are investing in politics and advertising at the cost of the product they exist to produce. They claim to address inequality and unfair pay, but do nothing of substance to address it. They are becoming far more minded with attracting profit than in producing the learning, the debate, the insight which made them world famous in the past. And at the end of the day, that means that not only are universities aiming to shift the burden of cost onto staff - they are aiming to shift it onto students as well. 

There’s only one day left of this industrial action. If you can, join the picket. But beyond this week : email the provost one more time, talk to fellow students about how these things affect us in a very direct way. Secure staff mean secure students.

What have unions ever done for us?

Some people who cross the picket line and choose to work during a strike do so because they don't support unions. That is, of course, their right: this is an issue that people dedicate a lot of thought to, especially when they are faced with the prospect of crossing a picket line staffed by their colleagues. It's a difficult choice to make, and no one does so lightly.

But it got us to thinking: why do we support the idea of unions? Why should anyone?

Firstly, unions fight for all workers. The rights and benefits that they win apply to everyone in the workplace, not just union members. Striking staff members are striking not just for themselves, but also for people who can't afford to strike (perhaps due to a casualised contract) and those who choose not to for other reasons.

Unions are also the only way for workers to bargain collectively with their employer. Without a union, employers would have to meet with each worker separately to try to understand how that worker feels about their job. Aside from the fact that such a situation is untenable in an institution like UCL (it has 13,360 employees!), this makes workers' concerns a lot easier to ignore, and leaves workers without much leverage to change conditions they don't like.

What kind of conditions are we talking about? Well here is a (non-exhaustive) list of some of the rights that unions have won for their workers over the years:

• weekends
• an end to child labour
• the ability to hold employers to their contracts, meaning a more equal relationship between worker and employer
• a safe workplace (that's not likely to injure you or make you sick)
• being able to negotiate as a group with the employer (known as 'collective bargaining')
• a minimum wage (in 1998 in the UK!!!)
• equal pay for equal work (e.g. for men and women doing the same job - in 1970 in the UK!)
• limits to working time, including the 40-hour work week
• paid time for holidays, including recent increases to annual leave entitlements
• lower pay inequality across the income spectrum, including in non-unionised workplaces
• employment protection rules, including rules about hiring and firing workers fairly 

If you've ever had a job (and if you didn't have a job as a child!), you've almost certainly benefitted from these rights, so go out and thank your closest union member. 

Whether you're a student or a staff member at UCL, you stand to gain from sustainable workloads at universities, an end to casualisation, an end to gender/race/disability pay gaps, an end to real-terms pay cuts, and protecting the USS pension scheme, and we're fighting for you. We're losing at least eight days of pay to make universities better places to work for everyone. So please, do what you can to support our strike: choose not to cross the picket line, write to the provost, donate to the fighting funds if you can. And come talk to us, about unions or anything else, at Strike School!

Bias in teaching evaluations

This weekend's reading list focuses on an issue we've all had experience with, students and teachers alike.

It's getting towards the end of term, and you know what that means: student feedback forms for all of your lectures. But there's a few things you might not know about these teaching evaluations.

Firstly, the government intends to use your feedback on teaching (specifically in the form of the National Student Survey, or NSS) to allow universities to charge you higher tuition fees, through something called the Teaching Excellence Framework or TEF. Some people (including the British Medical Association) think this alone is a good enough reason to boycott the NSS, but we'll leave that up to you.

Secondly, your lecturers and TAs actually read the anonymous feedback you give, and take it to heart. This can be a very nice feeling, like when a student notices something we've worked hard to improve or appreciates the extra effort we've gone to, or a very bad feeling, like when a student makes negative comments about our appearance, our personality or our intelligence. In fact, almost every one of the countless articles online that advise lecturers on how to deal with student feedback has advice along the lines of 'don't take it personally'. We cherish every positive comment we get, often for years, but the negative ones can sting pretty badly.

Finally, and most importantly, it has been established that teaching evaluations are subject to all kinds of bias. Women and people of colour consistently receive worse feedback than their white, male colleagues. (Very little research is done on bias in teaching evaluations against non-heterosexual people, people with disabilities, and non-gender conforming people.) Because teaching evaluations are often used in decisions about who to hire or who to promote, bias in teaching evaluations can lead to fewer women and people of colour progressing in their careers.

That's why this topic relevant to this blog: bias in teaching evaluations contributes to pay inequalities and more time spent on zero-hours and casualised contracts for the victims of that bias. This in turn leads to lower pensions for women and people of colour, since the introduction of career-average pensions.

To be clear, we don't want to do away with teaching evaluations completely: they are a very useful tool for us to improve our teaching and evaluate changes we've made in our modules (this is especially true when we use them during the term, when there is still time to make changes). Additionally, hearing students' perspectives can let us see things in a new light, giving us fresh ideas and highlighting areas for improvement. We really welcome constructive feedback!

But we reject to their use as a tool for university administrators to evaluate and decide on the worth of teaching staff individually and departments as a whole. We think they are another brick in the wall of corporatization in higher education. And we certainly reject the idea of linking good feedback to higher tuition fees.

So what can you do to help? You can keep all this in mind the next time a teaching evaluation comes your way. You can query members UCL's Senior Management Team on what they're doing to address these issues. You can contact your local parliamentary candidates about what they intend to do about the TEF. And you can continue to support our strike to fight back against casualisation, pay inequality, and damage to our pensions.

You can read more about bias in teaching evaluations, and why it's bad for both students and teachers, at the following links.

• Gender and cultural bias in student evaluations: Why representation matters
• Students Evaluating Teachers Doesn’t Just Hurt Teachers. It Hurts Students.
• Student Evaluations and Gendered Expectations: What We Can't Count Can Hurt Us
• Student Evaluations: Feared, Loathed, and Not Going Anywhere
• Student Evaluations, Grade Inflation, and Declining Student Effort
• Student Evaluations of Teaching are Not Valid 

Thank you, students!

We're three days in to the strike and we are simply overwhelmed with your support.

Students across UCL are supporting striking UCU workers, as evidenced by this open letter from Laws students, this mass rally, and this interview on Sky News.

But we think Chandler House students are the best. You've been bringing us coffee and baked goods. You've come down to the picket line to have a chat with us. You've been attending our Strike School events in numbers. You've been emailing the Provost. And you've been absolute stars in choosing not to cross the picket line.

We really appreciate each show of support. It's what keeps our hearts warm on the cold, wet picket line!

And there is even more good news: your support is making a real difference. After just two days of action, UCEA (the body that represents UL universities) agreed to consult with their members regarding casualisation, pay gaps and unsustainable workloads. Unfortunately, they are still unwilling to discuss our 20% real-terms fall in pay over the last decade. There's also no word from UUK (the body governing our pension scheme) that they intend to listen to us. That just means we need to shout louder!

Momentum is growing in this dispute, and our spirits are high. There are five more days of action, including teach-outs across UCL, the march for Planet, Pay & Pensions, and a day of joint strike action with our colleagues in IWGB on the 4th of December.

We are so excited to stand together with UCL's security, portering and cleaning staff in their fight to be brought in-house. Unlike us staid UCU staff, we've been warned that IWGB members know how to party! Here they are teaching us a lesson this morning:

Solidarity with @CHonStrike!@iwgbucl cleaners have your back!

Outsourced members and UCU academic and support staff are ready to strike together on 4th December!👊✊

Join us! pic.twitter.com/pD8YpQi8jt

— UCL-End Outsourcing!✊ (@iwgbucl) November 27, 2019

Make sure you come out on the 4th to support all striking staff, and get ready to make some noise!

Finally, we know student budgets are more stretched than ever, but if you possibly can we'd like to ask you to donate to UCU's fighting fund, and (especially) to IWGB's fighting fund. Fighting funds support striking workers, including by providing them with some strike pay, as strikers would otherwise be completely without pay for the time they are on strike (and possibly while participating in action short of a strike as well).

Thank you once again for all of your support!

What are we hoping to accomplish?

You might agree with UCU that casualisation, falling pay, unsustainable workloads, pay inequality, and rising pension costs are bad, but maybe you think there's not much to be done about them. Isn't life getting harder for everyone? And how exactly are universities supposed to bring about change in areas like workloads or pay inequality?

In other words, what exactly does UCU want to change?

Firstly, UCU is asking UCEA, the body that represents universities in the UK, to sit down and have a grown-up conversation about what can actually be done. This morning at Bentham House, representatives from UCU and UCEA are meeting to talk about the Four Fights dispute. UCEA have said the talks are 'without pre-conditions'... except they refuse to talk about pay! If universities are not willing to talk about pay (including pay inequality for women, ethnic minorities and people with disabilities, as well as falling real-terms pay), how do they expect to do anything about addressing these issues? If you want to ask employers this question, you can join the demonstration from 9:30 at the main entrance of Friends Meeting House (near Euston).

Here is the concrete action UCU is asking for on each of the issues:

• Pensions: 'No detriment'. This means that any changes to the pension scheme should not result in higher costs to members, or in lower pension payments. We don't think this is asking for a lot!
• Casualisation: 'Stamp out casualisation.' Universities are insisting that casualisation is a local issue - i.e. an issue that affect each university differently. This clearly misses the bigger picture. However, UCU are engaging individual universities in the fight on casualisation. Their demands include ensuring that all hourly-paid teaching staff (which includes most of your PGTAs as well as some Teaching Fellows and other teaching staff) to be employed on a (non-zero-hours) contract. The problem of casualisation goes beyond teaching staff, and UCU are committed to ending the gig economy in higher education. Again, we don't think it's a lot to ask that staff at universities, where students are paying between £9250 and £34,660, should be entitled to benefits like sick pay and maternity leave. 
• Pay inequality: 'Equal pay for equal work.' What year is it? 1952? Oh no, wait, it's 2019 and women, people from BAME backgrounds and people with disabilities are still getting paid less than their white, male, able-bodied colleagues. UCU is calling for meaningful action on this disgraceful inequality. UCEA is not willing to talk about pay. 
• Unsustainable workloads: 'An end to occupational stress and bullying.' UCU wants all of the work we do - administrative, pastoral, teaching-related, supervisory, research-related - to be fairly counted, and for workloads to be managed in a fair way. The fact that universities including UCL are threatening to withhold 100% of pay for employees who are working to rule by working a standard 36.5 hour week demonstrates that they know it is impossible for us to complete our contracted tasks in that time. 
• Falling pay: 'A real-terms pay rise'. UCU is asking for a pay rise of RPI+3%, or a minimum increase of £3,349 (whichever is greater). This is to address the fact that, over the last decade, our pay has fallen by 20%. At the same time, average rents in London have risen by as much as 30%. But not everyone is worse off - university Vice-Chancellors' pay (including UCL Provost Michael Arthur) rose by 13% between 2009 and 2017. Students are paying more fees than ever - where is your money going? 

More detail on UCU's demands can be found in this document from UCU.

Maybe you agree that things should change, but think that all these demands will just cost too much? UCL's UCU branch have shown that addressing issues with the USS pension will leave plenty of money left over to address the other demands (follow the link to the slides). UUK are currently paying to devalue our pensions!

UCL UCU are not alone. The Guardian's recent editorial shows that universities can and should pay to fix these problems. UCU shows that universities' income, surpluses and reserves are rising. Even the Vice-Chancellor of Essex University agrees that universities can pay more!

We hope you agree that our demands are not unreasonable. If so, we'd ask you to show your support however you can. 

What is a zero-hours contract?

A rise in the use of zero-hours contract is one symptom of rising casualisation in higher education, which is one of the targets of the current strike. Zero-hours contracts are a type of employment contract where the employer is not required to offer a minimum number of hours to the worker (note that people employed on zero-hours contracts are not legally considered employees, but merely workers), and the worker is not required to work a minimum number of hours. Zero-hours contracts can be useful when flexibility is required or desired on both sides of the employer-worker relationship, such as when a student wants to pick up a few hours here and there working at a shop during their busy periods, or a stay-at-home parent wants to earn a bit of extra money doing the filing for an office that sometimes gets behind.

Zero-hours contracts are clearly not suitable for work that has fixed hours, and where the worker can't say no to the hours offered. It may therefore come as a surprise to you to learn that most of your PGTAs and some of your lecturers are employed on zero-hours contracts. Despite the fact that teaching hours are fixed, and a TA or lecturer can't just decide to take a week off, decisions made at various levels of UCL have led to a situation where zero-hours contracts are often the easiest way for departments to employ non-permanent teaching staff like PGTAs and sabbatical cover. Many of these people teach for several years, but nonetheless don't have any job security or access to the benefits that people formally employed at UCL enjoy. That's why UCU is asking universities to stamp out zero-hours and other casual contracts.

You can read about the laws around zero-hours contracts here.

For personal stories of people affected by casualisation, see some of the posts on this blog (you can filter them using labels), as well as the following news stories:

Temporary work at £9 an hour. No wonder lecturers are balloting to strike The Guardian

University lecturers 'anxious' over casual contracts, union says BBC

Universities accused of 'importing Sports Direct model' for lecturers' pay The Guardian

This report from Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation:

‘I am a single mum. I don't feel like I can be as competitive as other people’: experiences of precariously employed staff at UK universities

And this report on the issue from the University and College Union:

Counting the costs of casualisation in higher education UCU

Why are we striking?

The University and College Union (UCU) is currently engaged in two disputes: one over governance of our pensions, and one over pay and equality (in particular, we want to address workloads; insecurity; real-terms cuts to salaries; and lack of progress on gender, race and disability equality. UCU members at 60 universities nationwide intend to strike starting on the 25th of November.

These two disputes are at the heart of two legally separate strike actions that are running concurrently.  Below you'll find some information on each of these disputes.

1) Pensions

In 2018, UCU completed 14 days of strike action over changes to members' pensions. Employers had previously changed the pension scheme to the detriment of members - lecturers lost the equivalent of 13% of their salaries due to changes imposed from 2011 onwards. Employers were hoping to move the pension from a defined benefit scheme (where your pension payments are guaranteed) to a defined contributions scheme (where your pension payments depend on how the investments do). In other words, employers wanted to open up pensions to a lot more risk, while asking members of the pension scheme to pay more out of their salaries. At the same time, staff were told that the pension scheme was in deficit; this was not true

UCU balloted for strike action, which members supported. When university management bodies refused to negotiate in good faith, your lecturers picketed for hours in sub-zero temperatures and snow. Throughout the UK, an estimated 42,000 staff went on strike with 575,000 teaching hours being lost.We received a huge amount of support from students and colleagues, and the end result was that the employers came back to the negotiating table, and both sides agreed to a panel (the JEP) to help make decisions in the future.

As a result of changes to the pension scheme the employers are currently proposing, each member stands to lose £240,000 in retirement. Pension members no longer trust that the people managing the pension scheme have their best interests at heart, and do not want to pay more for a pension that will pay them less.

Pensions are not a nice bonus for us - they are an integral part of the pay package we receive for the jobs we do. Cutting pensions, opening them up to risk, or asking us to pay more for them, is equivalent to reducing our pay. This is why we are fighting to protect them.

2) Four fights, one voice

UCU members are frustrated that no progress is being made on four other key issues that affect them. These are issues of basic fairness: between men and women, young and old, white and BAME. We are fighting for a fairer university for all.

a) Pay inequality

• Black academic staff earn 12-13% less than white colleagues of the same gender and experience
• Women in UK universities are paid on average 15% less than their male counterparts
• In many universities, these trends are actually worsening

b) Job insecurity

• Large numbers of staff are employed on fixed-term (non-permanent) contracts, casual contracts, and zero-hours contracts. Many of these staff are paid hourly.
• Hourly paid staff can sometimes end up earning less than minimum wage
• Many hourly paid staff aren’t paid for the time they spend giving feedback to students, marking essays or preparing seminars

c) Rising workloads

• The average academic works 55 hours a week, and is paid for 37.5

d) Pay deflation

• The value of pay in higher education has fallen by around 20% since 2009
• Falling pay also affects our pensions: changes to the pension scheme made in recent years ensure that our pensions are based on a career average salary, so less pay now means less pension later
• Vice-chancellors' (university bosses') pay is rising, while staff pay is falling

It’s all connected – the same reason so many people work insecure, badly paid jobs is the same reason why university staff pay and conditions are deteriorating. 

See below for some links between these two disputes: