Motions archive 2017

Our branch passed the following motions in 2017.

OU UCU motions passed at the Branch meeting on 8th March 2017

LOCAL MOTION ON EVENTS IN THE OU

This meeting believes that well managed change has always been and will always remain fundamental to the Open University’s success.  However, this meeting is concerned that the University has recently undertaken  too much change too quickly with negative consequences, and is currently vulnerable to risks from further imposed or badly managed change:

• student support has already been threatened by the implementation of GTP, and any further dilution of the student-tutor link risks damaging the quality of our students’ education;
• valuable expertise and knowledge has already been lost with the closure of the regional centres, and will no longer be available to support students through the unpredictable consequences of further fundamental change;
• staff are at breaking point from excessive workloads, constant fire-fighting and change fatigue, and further fundamental redesign may impact their ability to respond;
• (added during meeting) “77% of staff surveyed have no confidence in the VCE.”
• re-design may threaten or further delay the much needed new contract for AL staff.

This meeting instructs the OU UCU Executive to take all necessary actions to ensure that the OU Redesign review is sufficiently thorough and well managed to avoid damaging students, staff and the University, and the quality of the education we offer.  This should include, but is not restricted to:

• demanding the protection of staff welfare as a key priority;
• demanding the strengthening of the named-tutor-student link, as the fundamental cornerstone of student support;
• demanding and negotiating substantial and comprehensive staff consultation to ensure the review recommendations are well-founded and incorporate a thorough assessment of both the opportunities and the threats to the University, based on the full breadth of operational expertise;
• demanding and negotiating protection for staff terms and conditions and working conditions, and a clear and unequivocal commitment to a culture of respect and partnership between management and staff at all levels;
• demanding that management confirm their commitment to a new AL contract as a key current priority and to avoiding further slippage in its timescale;
• demanding complete transparency of the OU Redesign processes and all outcomes as delivered to management;
• requesting the detailed brief provided to KPMG for the OU Redesign be made available in full, now, along with the KPMG response to the brief; 
• requesting details of all current KPMG recommendations to the university from current and recent consultancy processes; 
• requesting details of all expenditure to KPMG and other consultants currently employed on such "change" projects; 
• requesting that management agree there will be only one OU Redesign report, and that it will be delivered to management and staff concurrently.

Motion 1 -  a motion proposed for UCU HE Sector Conference

Covert variable hours contracts

Conference reaffirms the view of 2014 Congress that all contracts that do not guarantee minimum hours or a minimum quantity of paid work are zero hours contracts.

Conference also believes that minimum hours are not "guaranteed" if the contract allows the employer to reduce hours below the minimum without mutual agreement or a redundancy process, and that a minimum must be an ongoing minimum rather than a percentage of the previous year's hours.

Conference resolves that all purported FTE or fractional contracts containing clauses allowing the employer to reduce hours and pay should not be considered fixed FTE contracts, but should be judged against policy, guidance and criteria for variable hours contracts. They should also be considered zero hours contracts if there is no genuinely guaranteed minimum.

Conference asks the HEC to ensure that this is reflected in HE ratification checklists and guidance and make sure it is widely known.

Motion 2 -  a motion proposed for UCU Congress

Staff subsidising Employers

Congress notes that 

1. There have been complaints from members who have had difficulty claiming legitimate expenses from their employers and have ended up out of pocket in some cases.
2. That some institutions do not provide clear information to staff about expense rates, how to claim, or about maximum amounts that can be claimed for certain things (e.g. overnight accommodation)
3. That some members have ended up paying for equipment that they have been assessed as needing as a reasonable adjustment, or in an Access to Work assessment

Congress asks the NEC to contact branches with guidance on employers' obligations, negotiating advice, and asks branches to press employers to provide clear, up to date, and easy to access information on institution web sites including expense rates, how to claim, and maximum amounts.