Cambridge urges end to talks impasse as marking delays loom

Vice-chancellor and union rep make rare joint statement appealing to national negotiators to resolve dispute

五月 22, 2023
The picket line at Senate House, Cambridge
The picket line at Senate House, Cambridge

The University of Cambridge’s vice-chancellor and the local lead for the University and College Union (UCU) have called for all sides to resume national talks on pay and conditions to prevent a marking boycott harming students.

Vice-chancellor Anthony Freeling and UCU branch president Michael Abberton said the boycott, which began on 20 April, would have a “significant impact” on students at what was already a “stressful and anxious time”.

“This cohort of students have already been hit especially hard by the pandemic; now, many are facing the likelihood that the completion of their degrees and their graduation may be delayed,” said Dr Freeling and Dr Abberton, adding that the boycott could bar foreign students from applying for post-study work visas.

They said both sides should return to the negotiating table “urgently, for the sake of our students, staff and members”. 

Responding to the call, the chief executive of the Universities and Colleges Employers Association (Ucea), Raj Jethwa, said that “the ball is in UCU’s court” and he was “sat at the negotiating table” waiting to resume.

On the other side, UCU general secretary Jo Grady said other Ucea members should “follow Cambridge’s lead” and call for the body to come back to the table.

Staff at Cambridge recently sought to introduce “exceptional” measures to ensure students were awarded degrees on time despite the boycott, but a vote at the university's governing body rejected the changes.

Pressure has been building on the two sides as the boycott threatens to boil over at other universities as well. Students at the University of Edinburgh attracted media attention earlier this month after saying they were worried their 10,000-word dissertations would not count towards their overall degrees.

The union said its members across 145 universities were currently part of the boycott, with Dr Grady adding that the joint statement was a “hugely significant moment” for ending the ongoing impasse.

Mr Jethwa denied UCU’s claim that Ucea had withdrawn from negotiations, but said it would only participate if all industrial action was paused.

“I would reiterate that, if the marking and assessment boycott is called off, Ucea retains its strong desire to begin constructive dialogue with the trade unions,” Mr Jethwa wrote on 11 May.

Cambridge only moved to recognise the union in March, a decision that brought it in line with the vast majority of other universities in the UK. Some had previously opposed recognition because staff are represented in internal committees. 

“No-one wants students to suffer further, and we are deeply sympathetic to the strength of feeling in our student body,” said Dr Freeling and Dr Abberton in their statement. “For many, including staff, this is a stressful and anxious time.”

ben.upton@timeshighereducation.com

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 (2)

To put it politely, Raj Jethwa is being disingenuous. Contrary to his claim that he is “sat at the negotiating table” waiting to resume negotiations with UCU, his published response to the Cambridge joint demand makes it clear that UCEA only wants to negotiate non-pay issues (i.e. casualisation, workload, inequalities). He is not prepared to discuss pay, which is why UCU members have been forced to adopt the marking and assessment boycott. A 5% increase in pay when inflation is still over 10% (on top of nearly two decades of below inflation pay rises) is an insult. It is below the average pay rises awarded in the private sector, below much of the public sector, and is eminently affordable given that universities never, thanks to tuition fees, suffered from Conservative government austerity. Instead of ensuring pay kept up with inflation, they chose to spend the injection of cash from fees on glitzy buildings and high pay for Vice-Chancellors and their ever-expanding senior management teams. A very small number of universities may genuinely not be able to pay more than 5%, which could be accommodated if they open up their books to scrutiny. But most last year recorded healthy surpluses and can readily afford more than 5% - especially as the fictional USS "deficit" has disappeared thanks to interest rates returning to normal levels after a decade of quantitative easing. My own institution, Manchester University, for example, had a 9.8% surplus last year - more than double its average surplus for the decade before the pandemic. Raj Jethwa, UCEA, and HE employers generally have a choice: genuinely come back and "sit at the negotiating table" with UCU and the other campus unions to discuss pay; or continue to refuse to do so, in which case they will cause irreparable damage to the prospects of a generation of students whose education has already been blighted by the pandemic and further antagonise and alienate the staff who are are the backbone of higher education.
What does 'open their books to scrutiny' mean? Each university publishes an annual report and financial statement.
ADVERTISEMENT