Brunel UCU Open Letter re USS

15th February 2022

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

You would have seen that the University and College Union (UCU) issued a set of new proposals for the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS) on 26 January 2022:
https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/11997/UCU-submits-new-pension-proposals-to-avert-UK-widestrike-action ]

These new proposals would see retirement benefits protected in return for a small increase in contributions for both members and employers ahead of a new evidence-based valuation of the scheme. A USS consultation of scheme members concluded on 17 January 2022, and UCU understands that a significant majority preferred increasing contributions of members and employers in order to protect benefits over the alternatives, including benefit cuts. Moreover, USS confirmed on Thursday 20 January that its assets have jumped to over £92bn, more than £25bn higher than the previous valuation.

Last year UCU tabled proposals that would have protected benefits, but Universities UK (UUK) refused to provide the same level of covenant support to underwrite UCU’s proposals as they provided for their own.
UCU’s proposals are as follows:

-that UUK call on USS to issue a moderately prudent, evidence-based valuation of the
financial health of the scheme as at 31 March 2022, to be issued for consultation in June (at the latest)
-that employers agree to provide the same level of covenant support as for their own
proposals to facilitate a cost-sharing of current benefits throughout the 2022/23 scheme
year, starting 1 April 2022 at 11% member/23.7% employer until 1 October 2022, and
11.8%/25.2% thereafter
-that employers agree to pay a maximum of 25.2% and members a maximum of 9.8% from 1 April 2023 so as to secure current benefits or, if not possible, the best achievable as a result of the call on USS to issue a moderately prudent, evidence-based valuation.

On the 10th February, the USS trustee confirmed that UCU proposals can be implemented: https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/12094/USS-trustee-confirms-UCU-proposals-can-be-implemented

However, there has been subsequent concern that UUK have misrepresented the UCU proposals to Vice Chancellors:
UUK’s serious misrepresentations of UCU’s proposals (Pt I) | by Michael Otsuka | Feb, 2022 | Medium

UUK’s escalating misrepresentation of UCU’s proposals (Pt II) | by Michael Otsuka | Feb, 2022 | Medium

We are writing to ask whether you would support UCU’s proposals instead of UUK’s plan. Under UUK’s plan university staff would see an approximate 35% cut to their guaranteed retirement income based on a flawed USS valuation conducted in March 2020.

Yours sincerely

Brunel UCU branch committe

BRUNEL UCU: LEADING THE WAY IN JOINT TRADE UNION DISPUTE OVER PAY STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (CHAIR, BRUNEL UCU BRANCH) 15 DECEMBER 2021

In March 2020, five trade unions within the UK (UCU, UNISON, UNITE, GMB, and EIS) issued a Higher Education Joint Unions Pay Claim to the Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA).  This dispute, which national UCU have labelled as Four Fights (due to its consideration of pay, equality, workload and casualisation as interrelated issues), is ongoing.  Here is a key passage from the letter that the trade unions collectively have submitted:

The joint unions are seeking:

  • a national, time specific, agreement detailing how action will be achieved by each HEI working with their trade unions to close the gender, race and disability pay gap,
  • An implementation agreement agreed by HEI management and their trade unions which is then progressed and reported back to new JNCHES.
  • a commitment by all UCEA affiliates to encourage their staff to declare their protected characteristics with their employers to help address discrimination; then the completion of a full Equal Pay Audit covering all protected characteristics by a specific date, and all the data to be shared with the campus unions. UCEA to collate and share with the unions nationally copies of all the Gender Pay actions plans drawn up by UCEA affiliates. (p. 14)

As you may know, four of the five trade unions in question (UCU, UNISON, UNITE, and GMB) are recognised by Brunel University London.  I am pleased to report that the Brunel UCU Branch are leading the way concerning the pay dispute at the local level, currently pursuing a re-ballot on industrial action (and action short of strike, or ASOS).  Even though well over 70% of our members who voted in November did support industrial action and ASAS, current UK government restrictions place a unique burden upon trade unions:  Not only do most of the voters need to support industrial action and ASOS; but most of our membership need to cast a ballot in the first instance.  Thus, the Brunel UCU Branch Committee ask – once again – that you cast ballots in favour of industrial action and ASOS concerning the pay dispute with UCEA.

Of course, as you know, the separate dispute between UCU and Universities UK (UUK) over Universities Superannuated Scheme (USS) pensions is ongoing as well.  Unlike the pay dispute (which is a joint union dispute), the pensions dispute is limited to UCU (because our members will be disproportionately and adversely affected by proposed changes to the scheme).  In any event, please be sure to cast your separate ballots (i.e., pay and pensions) in favour of industrial action and ASOS.  Thanks so much, in advance, for your support!

STUDENT SUPPORT FOR UCU’S INDUSTRIAL ACTION STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (CHAIR, BRUNEL UCU BRANCH) 8 DECEMBER 2021

Recently, the immediate Past President of Universities UK (who, not coincidentally, is the current Vice Chancellor and President of Brunel University London) has made public statements that falsely imply a lack of student support for national UCU’s industrial action.  However, a look at the National Union of Students (NUS) Web site (Student views on UCU strikes revealed by NUS @ NUS) reveals overwhelming student support for UCU’s industrial action.  In fact, NUS have launched a petition in support of UCU (emphasis in the original text):

Dear UUK and UCEA executives, We are writing on behalf of students, the vast majority of whom support the UCU strikes, and all of whom are negatively impacted by an unsustainable HE system.  Research undertaken by NUS has found that 73% of students support the UCU strikes, and 69% have said that they would be willing to take action to campaign for a fully-funded, accessible, lifelong and democratised education system.  The shocking truth is that senior management pay and benefits has increased in recent years, with Vice Chancellors average total pay reaching £269,000. Meanwhile academic staff on the ground have only seen more work for less reward. Many have reached their breaking point.  Students know that staff don’t want to have to go on strike, and have worked tirelessly before and during the pandemic to do the jobs they love in universities and colleges across the UK.  Against the backdrop that staff have had to stand up against, it is not only unsustainable, but it is cruel to watch them continue to be undervalued and underpaid in Higher Education.  The same education system that leaves 1 in 10 students needing to access food banks in the pandemic is the same system that leaves 75,000 of postgraduate students and other university staff on casualised contracts.  The same system pursuing the policing and securitisation of students of colour is producing a 17% race pay gap for staff.  The system is as exploitative and unfair to students as it is to staff – these cannot be divorced from each other.  This is distinctly true for postgraduate students on casualised teaching contracts, and many are given no choice but to strike given what a dire situation this has become.  The way that staff have been forced to work under the current circumstances impacts how they can teach us, and the communities we can build on campus. Staff working conditions are our learning conditions, and we must stand together if we are to realise a new vision for education that is truly democratised: run by and for the students, staff and communities that education exists to serve.  Staff deserve to be paid fairly for their work. They deserve contracts that guarantee them a stable job, and workloads that are manageable. Women, disabled staff and staff of colour deserve pay parity with their counterparts.  We, the undersigned, are asking that you return to the negotiating table and meet UCU’s demands.

211124 BRUNEL UCU PASSES UNANIMOUS RESOLUTION AT OGM: GUCU STRIKE FUND MOTION

GUCU STRIKE FUND MOTION GUCU Strike Fund Motion | Goldsmiths University and College Union (goldsmithsucu.org)

This branch notes:

  1. That Goldsmiths UCU (GUCU) is in dispute with the Senior Management Team (SMT) at Goldsmiths, University of London over 20 FTE planned redundancies as part of SMT’s Academic Portfolio Review (APR) aimed at reducing staff costs.
  2. That a further 32 redundancies are planned in professional services, directly affecting the working conditions of academic staff and students.
  3. That this restructuring undermines the autonomy of departments, lecturers and researchers, increasingly centralising power over budgets, decision-making, academic portfolios and procedures with SMT.
  4. That moves towards restructuring at Goldsmiths are already having a seriously detrimental effect on the functioning of the university, such that basic services for staff and students are collapsing.
  5. That SMT has spent over £2.5m in consultants and untold costs on change managers related to the restructuring.
  6. That SMT has employed union-busting tactics in the past, and is currently delaying payment to key GUCU branch officials for carrying out trade union activities.
  7. The determination of GUCU members to fight for decent working conditions for all staff at Goldsmiths.

This branch believes: 

  1. That SMT has not explored alternatives to cuts, including stopping the use of expensive consultants and managers; fundraising; applying for government funds in Arts and Humanities; developing a vision for growth etc.
  2. That the planned cuts at Goldsmiths follow a pattern of financialisation increasingly seen across UK Higher Education Institutions, whereby financial pressures from banking partners are used to justify restructures that prioritise the cutting of frontline staff while increasing managerial costs.
  3. That the battle against redundancies and the financialisation of Goldsmiths make GUCU’s dispute one of national significance.

This branch resolves:

  1. To issue a public statement of solidarity with GUCU’s dispute.
  2. To make a contribution to GUCU’s strike fund.
  3. To invite a GUCU striker to a branch meeting.
  4. To write to Frances Corner (Warden) at f.corner@gold.ac.uk and wardensoffice@gold.ac.uk and Dinah Caine (Chair of Council) at d.caine@gold.ac.uk expressing opposition to the redundancies and restructuring.
  5. To actively support and publicise GUCU’s dispute, strike days and campaign events through social media, trade union contacts and beyond.

SECOND OPEN LETTER TO PROFESSOR JULIA BUCKINGHAM (BRUNEL VICE CHANCELLOR AND PRESIDENT) FROM STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

1st November 2021

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

Thank you for your letter that I received on 29 October 2021, in response to my earlier letter to you (dated 25 October 2021). On the one hand, I am disappointed that you will allow your comments on the Professional Pensions Web site (8 October 2021) to stand. On the other hand, I am heartened by your apparent acknowledgement that Brunel UCU members can safely:

(1) Vote during the current pensions and pay ballot,

(2) Vote for industrial action (and action short of strike), and

(3) Engage in industrial action (and action short of strike) without fear of retaliation from members of Brunel senior management.

Accordingly, I shall communicate your acknowledgement to Brunel UCU members as a whole.

Thank you

Yours Sincerely

STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

RESPONSE FROM PROFESSOR JULIA BUCKINGHAM (BRUNEL VICE CHANCELLOR AND PRESIDENT) TO STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

28 October 2021

Dear Dr Gaines,

I write further to UCU’s open letter dated 25th October 2021 regarding my statement to
Professional Pensions concerning the USS pensions dispute.

While I appreciate that UCU may not agree with my statement, as a university leader and a spokesperson for UUK, it remains my view that changes to the scheme are unfortunately necessary if we are to avoid unaffordable contribution increases for both employees and employers. Without reforms to the scheme, the USS Trustee has confirmed it will impose contribution rises from April 2022, rising to 18.8% for members and 38.2% for employers by 2023, to address the scheme deficit.

I am sure we can all agree on the importance of a good pension provision and I am concerned that we will see an even greater number of staff leave or not join USS because the contribution rates are unaffordable.

My statement, while not specific to Brunel, recognises the impact of further pension contribution rises for universities at a time of already great financial challenge and university leaders are indeed concerned about the impact of such increases on the financial sustainability of their institution. My comments are not meant in any way to cause alarm or voter suppression but instead reflect the uncomfortable reality that some employers will face if we are unable to shore up USS by making changes that guarantee good benefits without significant additional costs.

Yours sincerely,
Professor Julia Buckingham
Vice-Chancellor and President

AN OPEN LETTER TO PROFESSOR JULIA BUCKINGHAM (BRUNEL VICE CHANCELLOR AND PRESIDENT) FROM STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

25th October 2021

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

Within the Brunel UCU Branch, we are concerned about a recent statement that you made directly to the Professional Pensions Web site, concerning prospective industrial action over the USS pensions dispute.  Here are your own words from 8 October 2021:

The spectre of higher contributions is causing a great deal of worry for university leaders.  Staff have worked immensely hard through the extremely challenging conditions forced on us by the Covid-19 pandemic, and it would be an utter travesty if further pension contributions hikes led to more staff not joining the scheme because of the cost, a further exodus of current staff members from the scheme because they cannot afford to pay in more, and mass redundancies as employers have to cut back elsewhere to pay higher pension costs.  With so much financial uncertainty currently engulfing universities, and the significant financial pressures last year brought due to loss of commercial income and additional spending to make campuses Covid-secure and move teaching and support online, now is the time to shore up USS by making changes that guarantee good pension benefits without significant additional costs.

These comments could be construed as attempts toward intimidation and voter suppression – both of which constitute bullying.  UCU members at Brunel apparently face the prospective loss of their jobs if they cast ballots (let alone vote for industrial action), based on your comments.

I respectfully ask that you retract your potentially intimidating 8 October 2021 comments from the Professional Pensions Web site.  In particular, I ask that you act accordingly within the next week (i.e., by 1 November 2021) and immediately inform me once you have acted upon this request.

Thank you

Yours Sincerely

 

STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

CHAIR STATEMENT: ON THE BRUNEL VC/UUK PRESIDENT’S COMMENTS IN PROFESSIONAL PENSIONS (8 OCTOBER 2021)

ON THE BRUNEL VC/UUK PRESIDENT’S COMMENTS

IN PROFESSIONAL PENSIONS (8 OCTOBER 2021)

STANLEY O. GAINES, JR. (BRUNEL UCU BRANCH CHAIR)

13 OCTOBER 2021

Across the UK, pensions officers for UCU Branches learned about an online article (originally posted on the Professional Pensions Web site, 8 October 2021) that featured comments by the Brunel University London Vice Chancellor (and President of Universities UK) concerning the USS pension scheme. The Brunel VC/UUK President’s comments are extraordinary in explicitly tying (1) USS’s (and UCU)’s prospective failure to implement UUK’s flawed proposal for changing pension contributions with (2) Brunel University London’s (and, presumably, all UUK-affiliated employers’) prospective mass redundancies in the near future. Here are the Brunel VC/UUK President’s own words on the future of USS pensions (and the future of higher education employees’ jobs, whether those employees are USS members or not):

The spectre of higher contributions is causing a great deal of worry for university leaders. Staff have worked immensely hard through the extremely challenging conditions forced on us by the Covid-19 pandemic, and it would be an utter travesty if further pension contributions hikes led to more staff not joining the scheme because of the cost, a further exodus of current staff members from the scheme because they cannot afford to pay in more, and mass redundancies as employers have to cut back elsewhere to pay higher pension costs. With so much financial uncertainty currently engulfing universities, and the significant financial pressures last year brought due to loss of commercial income and additional spending to make campuses Covid-secure and move teaching and support online, now is the time to shore up USS by making changes that guarantee good pension benefits without significant additional costs.

I note that this is the same Brunel VC/UUK President who failed to support the 7-point plan than the national UCU headquarters had proposed for the UK government to invest in UK universities (released on 2 April 2020 — shortly after the first COVID-triggered lockdowns were imposed within the UK and around the world). Imagine what combined pressure UUK and UCU could have brought to bear upon the UK government to provide adequate COVID-era funding for higher education institutions, just as the global pandemic had begun to upend lives and livelihoods in a manner that had not been witnessed since another pandemic ravaged humanity a century ago. One must wonder why the Brunel VC/UUK President waited for so long to publicly acknowledge the scale of the financial difficulties that UCU had anticipated so soon after the lockdowns began, and why the USS pension scheme (rather than UUK’s own inadequate, piecemeal request to the UK government on 9 April 2020) has emerged as the Brunel VC/UUK President’s scapegoat for raising the spectre of widespread job losses at Brunel and across the UK.

Not only should Brunel UCU members be concerned; but UCU at all levels (Branches, Regional Offices, and National Headquarters) should be outraged. Let us regard the Brunel VC/UUK President’s comments as fighting words; and let us cast our ballots for industrial action against UUK employers, in Uxbridge and beyond.

COP26 Brunel UCU Motion 22 09 21

This branch notes the urgent need for action on the climate emergency, both in response to existing negative impacts such as extreme weather, fires, droughts, floods, and loss of habitat and species; and to avoid catastrophic and irreversible damage caused by global heating.

We note that big business, the military, and the rich are responsible for the vast majority of greenhouse gas emissions, while workers and the world’s poor are disproportionately at risk. A just transition to a decarbonised economy, one that protects the lives, livelihoods, and rights of workers and the poor, is the only way the movement against climate chaos will secure the mass support it needs to win, and to avoid a rich minority protecting themselves at the expense of the planet and the vast majority.

We note that the UN ‘COP’ climate change conferences have become a focus for campaigners, that COP26 will be taking place in Glasgow from 1-12 November 2021, and that many organisations are already making plans.

We resolve to:

Organise to make COP26 in Glasgow, 9-19 November 2021, a focus of campaigning for effective action on the climate emergency.

Work with local trade unions and environmental organisations to arrange discussions locally and within workplaces about practically how we can prepare for COP26.

Call on Brunel University to declare a climate emergency and to involve unions in planning, implementing, and monitoring to rapidly reduce carbon emissions to zero.

Call on Brunel University to recognise UCU environmental reps, give them work time for their activities, and act vigorously to reduce the reliance on fossil energy of Brunel University and its staff.

Create climate action groups at workplace level and within union structures.

Look for opportunities for unions, communities, and the climate movement to work together, for example for improved housing and public transport.

Call on the UCU to carry out a major exercise to understand the potential positive and negative impacts of the climate crisis and responses to it on employment.

Call on the UCU and universities to work rapidly toward removing all pressure on academics and managers to take flights, unless with battery-powered aircraft.

Discuss what climate-related demands to include in collective bargaining, including ones which could be the basis of a lawful ‘trade dispute’ under current legislation and to call on the UCU to develop guidance on this.

Campaign for a legal right to strike and to repeal all legislation that makes it harder to strike over climate and decarbonisation issues.

Ensure that the UCU is visible as a relevant and useful organisation within the climate movement.

Demand colossal public investment in the jobs required to address the climate emergency, including in renewable energy, housing, and public transport.

Demand support for people coping with or fleeing the consequences of climate breakdown, whether internally within Britain or from abroad.

Send this motion to our local trades union council, to Hillingdon Council, and to the UCU.