Category: Uncategorized

We are alarmed to hear reports of multiple failures by university managers to organise properly the planning of workloads for the coming acadmic year.

We have heard of failure to incorporate research time in  AWBMs, along with the absence of “headroom”, and the complete omission of the 185 hours “independent scholarly activity”, which is protected under the terms of the Collective Agreement signed by the VC and UCU in May 2022.

The agreement was reached in order to safeguard the wellbeing of academic staff and to allow for the timely and efficient planning of workloads.

If colleagues witness the failure to uphold or are pressurised into violating the terms of the agreement we urge you contact the branch immediately.

ARU Branch Executive

At Anglia Ruskin University, we are now presented with a crisis and a scandal, so severe and far reaching, that we must call into question the willingness and capacity of university leaders to fulfil their obligations to our community.

There have been shocking revelations of a £50,000 donation, of questionable legal status, to the Conservative Party.

For further information, read our statement in full here.

ARU UCU Branch Executive

In his e-mail from April 29th, 2024, the Vice-Chancellor noted the problematic situation with international student recruitment, stated the need to improve the efficiency of our work, and drew our attention to several workstreams that are looking to make changes to our processes, delivery of professional services, academic portfolios and workloads, etc.

While we recognize the challenges in our sector, we find the Vice-Chancellor’s statements problematic in a number of ways. In our last Joint Consultative and Negotiating Group (JCNG) meeting on March 18th, where these issues were discussed, and subsequently:

a) We have not received any documentary evidence for the Trade Unions to review in relation to the implied lack of efficiency in the work of ARU staff,

b) We have not received any investment analysis for the various areas of our University, that clearly set out cases for efficiency savings,

c) We have not received any workforce planning analysis that would show what exactly the University is planning to do in terms of our workloads and our work-life balance,

d) The Vice-Chancellor did not state in his e-mail any of the highly problematic proposals for academic workforce planning that came up in the JCNG meeting, such as the introduction of teaching-only roles; and intrusive, micro-managerial inspections of how academics spend their time,

e) The Vice-Chancellor has denied our request for a local pay uplift, despite the University’s stated commitment to staff wellbeing, and despite the cost-of-living crisis chipping away (yet again) at our real incomes.

The Vice-Chancellor keeps insisting on everyone needing to tighten their belts. Yet, the Vice-Chancellor’s Group has received significant pay uplifts in recent years, there is a massive spend planned for the Creative Quarter, costly Agents’ Conferences are hosted in exotic locations, and there is a planned budget-busting staff party in June. These spending decisions not only seem insensitive, but are also confusing and contradictory to the stated need to tighten our belts in one way or another.

Both ARU UCU and ARU Unison recognize the issues in our sector, but we believe that a modest reallocation of funds to staff salaries, the maintenance of a work-life balance, and of a normal pace of work, are all perfectly feasible, even within the current context. We remain committed to working constructively with management to find genuinely consensual solutions in the spirit of collective bargaining and negotiation.

You can find ARU UCU’s and ARU Unison’s full joint statement after the last JCNG meeting here. You can also visit ARU Unison’s website here.

ARU UCU Branch Executive and ARU Unison Branch Committee

On Thursday, March 14th, ARU UCU met with ARU management for the third time for negotiations to resolve the ongoing official dispute about last year’s October proposal to evict colleagues from their offices in the Helmore building on the Cambridge campus.

UCU welcomes the commitment of the university to reset and restart the consultation process about the shape and viability of the proposed development of the Creative Quarter, the building project which has given rise to the proposed restructuring of workspaces.

However, thus far we have yet to hear concrete proposals from University management to address the full range of concerns our members expressed about the proposed eviction. We are also concerned that the decision of the university to forge contracts with developers and establish timetables for work to commence, prior to reaching agreement with UCU, is exposing our community to costs which we can ill afford. Nevertheless, we are grateful that, at yesterday’s meeting, university management denied categorically the claim that UCU is somehow responsible for the delays in consultation and development, along with the consequent loss of revenue which will follow.

Our negotiators have made it clear that we are open to compromise. As we have said before, UCU is not in the business of subsidising failure. It is imperative for our community at ARU that this dispute is resolved as quickly as possible.

As acknowledged by senior leaders in the university, the status quo will prevail until such point as a resolution is found.

UCU ARU Branch Executive

Following a unanimous decision, ARU UCU Branch Executive has presented an Open Letter to Professor Roderick Watkins, VC of ARU, calling for action in relation to the Israel-Palestine war.

The university is called upon to establish joint committees with UCU to:

1. Investigate the ties our university has with companies which facilitate or profit from the war and where appropriate sever such links.
2. Establish ARU scholarships for refugees and displaced people affected by the war.
3. Provide support for academics who have seen their institutions destroyed.

You can read our letter here.

ARU Branch Executive

UCU has just published a report on the precarity of research-only staff in the UK higher education sector. The report is based on freedom of information requests sent to 103 universities and sought to determine the level of support that universities are providing to research-only staff to improve their security of employment.

ARU scored only 34.5/100 in its support for research-only staff.

You can download the entire report here.

We are requesting views and information from our research-only colleagues around their experiences of precarious employment practices, so that we can take this matter forward. Please get in touch by contacting us at arubranch@ucu-branches.org.uk. If you have any other questions, you can also get in touch via the same e-mail.

ARU Branch Executive

UCU is electing a trustee, general secretary and vice-president, and national executive committee members. All UCU members are entitled to vote. Don’t let your vote go to waste – the deadline to vote is March 1^st.

This video explains what the national executive committee is, and why it’s important for members to vote.

More information on the candidates/election further info is available here.

ARU UCU Branch executive

Dear Members,

The local UCU Branch Executive has sent a letter to the VC regarding our demand for a local pay uplift of £7,000, to be paid in recognition of the high costs of living and working in Cambridge and Chelmsford, while in the employment of Anglia Ruskin University.

We first raised this issue at the February meeting of the JCNG (Joint Consultation and Negotiation Group), where senior leaders meet us periodically to discuss and agree matters of mutual concern, then again in the July meeting of the JCNG, and then again in the November meeting. In the last meeting, we were assured that by December 1st, ARU would get back to us with a timetable for discussions. This has, unfortunately, not happened.

As we pointed out at the time, it is better for all concerned that this matter is addressed sooner rather than later and in the spirit of cooperation. While being actively planned for, the alternative of mass campaigns, mobilization, and industrial action is no one’s preferred way forward. We are therefore looking forward to receiving a reply from the VC about the discussions.

You can read our full letter here.

ARU UCU Branch Executive

UCU Branch negotiators met with ARU senior leaders on December 13^th, with the aim of starting to find a way forward to resolving the Official Dispute called by UCU on November 15^th.

By way of reminder, the Official Dispute was declared over ARU’s request for all AHESS staff to vacate the Helmore building on the Cambridge campus before Christmas, in order to make way for the building of the Creative Quarter. This was done without any consultation with staff, students, and external stakeholders; without any prior notice; without legal or equality assessment; without any assessment of the impact on staff or students; etc. You can read about the UCU declaration of the Official Dispute here and about ARU’s consequent postponement of the eviction here.

In their opening statement, our negotiators agreed with ARU that we want to work constructively with ARU on finding a way forward that works for everyone involved. While our misgivings and frustration with how staff and UCU have been treated are genuine, we agree that at this point it is more important to focus on solutions, rather than recriminations. In light of that, our negotiating team set out a number of questions that UCU would like addressed in the coming discussions:

• How does ARU plan to hold consultations with staff, students, and external stakeholders (traders in the surrounding area, the local Diocese, etc.) on the building of the Creative Quarter?

• Can ARU set out a clear plan for conducting equality and other assessments of the impacts upon staff of having to move out of the Helmore building (e.g. the question of sufficient private spaces for office hours, space for staff to store their books and documents, space for staff to wait and work in between classes, the impact on neurodiverse staff)?

• How does ARU plan to compensate groups (staff, students, external stakeholders) that will be severely affected by the construction works (e.g. in terms of noise, pollution, reduced street access, lost office space, etc.)?

• Why have the estimated costs of building the Creative Quarter gone up from £30mn to £60mn and how does ARU plan to cover these costs and keep them under control going forward?

• ARU has been arguing for several years that growth in student numbers has to be one of the University’s goals. However, in the Creative Quarter planning documents submitted to Cambridge City Council, it is noted that ARU was asked whether the Creative Quarter was part of a plan to increase student numbers, to which ARU responded in the negative. Can ARU provide an answer to what is going on?

• Why has ARU barely, if at all, mentioned the Creative Quarter plans in its marketing and PR materials, if it finds its building to be so important for ARU’s future?

• Why has there been no vote in the Senate on the building of the Creative Quarter and does ARU plan to hold such a vote going forward?

You can read our full opening statement here.

We look forward to working with the leadership of the university to find a resolution. It will take time to get there, but we are confident that with goodwill and a commitment to seeking resolution based upon reason we can succeed together. We will keep everyone updated about the progress of the negotiations as they happen.

ARU UCU Branch Executive

Following our announcement of an official dispute (see here), ARU has postponed until further notice its decision to evict staff from the Helmore building. However, the architects of the original decision have neither taken responsibility for it, nor acknowledged our decisive intervention. It fell to the Interim Dean of AHESS to issue an apology and acknowledge the unnecessary distress caused.

The UCU branch executive will update colleagues on the next steps. While the rapid retreat of management from its most ludicrous of decisions is welcome, we await further information as to how the university proposes to rebuild the trust that has been shattered.

ARU UCU Branch Executive