The Open University branch of the University and College Union
Rule Change Motion to align with previous practice on accepting late motions
Add the following text at the end of rule 13.2: "Late motions may be accepted at the discretion of the chair. A late motion should be urgent and timely in the sense it could not reasonably have met the normal deadline (13 days before the meeting) and needs to be considered before the next general meeting."
Add the following text at the end of rule 13.1: "Late motions may be accepted at the discretion of the chair. A late motion should be urgent and timely in the sense it could not reasonably have met the normal deadline (20 days before the meeting) and needs to be considered before the next general meeting."
Local motion
The Industrial Action taken over the past two years has led to the restoration of the USS pension terms, leading to improved financial position for scheme members potentially totalling multiple thousands of pounds. Whilst the full UCU demands on pay were not met, a pay rise was won and implemented earlier in the annual cycle than is usual.
The Extraordinary General meeting on 16th November 2022 resolved to set up of a local hardship fund to supplement the national UCU fighting fund during any action over USS pensions or over pay this academic year. The purpose of the fund is to support branch members who face hardship as a result of pay deductions.
It authorised:
The Hardship Fund has distributed the £50,000 and has a number of further claims to assess. The branch finances as a whole are secure, and the proposed resolution can be made without difficulty.
The branch resolves:
Motion 1 for: UCU Higher education conference, Student Fees and impact on participation in HE
Conference notes:
Conference believes:
Conference resolves:
Motion 2 for: UCU Higher education conference, Defend pro-Palestinian Voices, Academic Freedom and Trade Union Organising
Conference notes:
Conference believes:
Conference resolves to:
Motion for: UCU Congress: Resisting anti-union legislation (minimum service levels)
Congress notes:
Congress believes:
Congress instructs:
Motion 1 on agreed donations
This branch notes that motions passed by the branch in November and December 2023 called for donations to the below listed organisations but did not specify the amounts to be donated. This branch requests that these donations be made at the following amounts as swiftly as practicable:
Motion 2 - Campaign for a richer tuition model
In recent years there have been significant changes to tuition practices in the OU. This year has seen the end of most face-to-face tuition. In the past the university had a well-deserved reputation for pedagogical innovation in distance learning that derived from a robust research base and formed the basis of the tuition model known as Supported Open Learning.
Changes in practice, such as the group tuition model and the shift to online by default seem to have been driven by financial and administrative imperatives without rigorous links to evidence, research or outcomes for students.
We are asking for the OU UCU branch to lead a campaign for a new and richer tuition model that includes students and non-members.
In the first instance, we’re asking the branch for:
Emergency Motion 3 – OU Branch UCU solidarity with UCU members facing redundancy or made redundant
This branch notes:
The chilling effect of UK HE senior management teams threatening and/or carrying out redundancies across the sector (including at Brighton, Roehampton, Aberdeen, QUB, Sheffield Hallam, and Oxford Brookes).
This branch resolves to:
Motion 1 - Motion on Palestine
This branch notes:
This branch believes:
This branch resolves:
This meeting notes:
This meeting believes:
This meeting asks the executive committee to seek input from members of all staff categories to build a picture of what is happening on the ground and defend members against further workload creep and resist any attempts by management to disregard existing workload norms.
This branch notes:
The escalating military conflict in Gaza accompanied by clear war crimes and an escalating humanitarian disaster.
This branch believes:
This branch therefore calls for:
Motion 1 - Equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI), Dean of EDI
The branch notes with concern that following the move of Marcia Wilson to London Metropolitan to take up a senior role there, the role of Dean of EDI has apparently been allowed to lapse. While we wish to extend our heartfelt congratulations to Prof. Wilson on her new appointment, questions and concerns have been raised by many staff with protected characteristics across the different staff network groups, and also in Senate.
In response the university have said that LJ is still in post and have created a Directorship of EDI in place of the Dean of EDI role - apparently under the University Secretary's Office, rather than reporting directly to the Vice Chancellor's Office as the Dean's role did. The university have said that the Dean of EDI role was always a temporary appointment and that although its full term has not yet been run, a review is going to be undertaken - although no clear timetable for this review has been set out.
This branch wishes to express grave concern about the possible slowdown of work on EDI across the university, which was proceeding at good pace compared to other HE institutions (although there was considerable work needing to be done). There is potential conflict of interest with the work coming under the University Secretary's Office rather than reporting directly to the Vice Chancellor's Office. Creating a Directorship rather than appointing the Deputy Dean of EDI as interim Dean sends a poor message about how much the university prioritises the EDI work.
There has been loss of confidence in the university's commitment to EDI and this branch believes this approach is not the correct one for us at this time. We call on the University to undertake a proper consultation on this issue, and to include this in a clear timetable for the review they are undertaking.
Motion 2: Supporting OU Staff with fees for UK work visas and the UK’s International Health Surcharge
Branch notes:
The UK Home Office announced an increase in UK work visa and International Health Surcharge (IHS) fees in July 2023. The change in the International Health Surcharge (IHS) from £624 per year to £1,035 a year – a 66% jump – is expected to come into effect in early 2024. The work visa fee changes were published on 15 September 2023 and will come into effect on 4 October 2023. The changes reflect a 15% increase in cost for most visa applications and a 20% increase in cost for Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR) applications.
This increase of expenses will be incurred by those current and future OU staff who require a visa or an ILR to work in the UK. This is, and is likely to remain, a small minority of OU staff.
The current OU Relocation Expenses policy states that staff are re-imbursed the cost of the visa application fee at the time of their initial onboarding. This means that new staff have to pay the IHS themselves and current staff must pay both IHS and visa application fees every time their contracts are extended, if they are issued a new contract, or if they apply for an Indefinite Leave to Remain (ILR). For example, this charge would be incurred every time an existing Fixed Term Contract is extended, or a new Fixed Term Contract is issued (as commonly occurs at the end or start of project-based work), even if the employment with the OU is unbroken. The charge would also be incurred if the FTE (Full Time Equivalent) component of a contract is altered, whether fixed term or permanent. While employees who apply for an ILR do not pay IHS, they still must pay the application fee of £2,885.
Whilst the fees component of the visa system would be costly for any worker, the OU’s approach to managing contracts creates significant barriers to employment. Issuing staff with permanent contracts and then using OU-internal workload and financial management to allocate their time and costs, rather than by issuing or extending Fixed Term Contracts or Additional Duties Contracts, would mean many visa charges were not generated. It is the OU’s decision to use contracts to manage workload and finances which prevents individuals requiring a work visa from taking up a range of employment opportunities.
Reimbursements of visa fees are regarded as a taxable benefit unless it is a new employee applying for their visa outside the UK. This means that under HMRC regulations, the payment is subject to tax and National Insurance contributions. Even if the OU covers the full costs of visa fees, contract changes may alter the tax status of an individual, such as moving them into a higher tax bracket.
While the university offers a visa costs loan scheme which does not exceed £5,000, this policy perpetuates a divide between foreigner and non-foreigner workers who have to shoulder these exuberant costs. As an example, consider staff members who are already residing the UK and who would start a new contract on 4 January 2024:
On a 3 year contract a new staff member will incur £3,105 (£1,035*3 years IHS fees) and an existing staff member will incur £3,824 (£719 visa application fee + £1,035*3 years IHS fees),
On a 5 year contract a new staff member will incur £5,175 (£1,035*5 years IHS fees), and an existing staff member will incur £6,598 (£1,423 visa application fee + £1,035*5 years IHS fees).
Note that a staff member who is on a contract which renews yearly will incur £1,754 per year; so, if an existing staff member works for three years, then this cost adds up to £5,262. Other universities already support their staff with their expenses, including Durham University, University of Bath, University of Sussex, University of Exeter, University of Dundee, etc.
Branch resolves:
To campaign for a change in policy and procedure so that the Open University covers visa fees for current employees and the IHS for new and current employees.
To liaise closely with the OU EDI team and the International Staff Network.
To campaign for increased use of permanent contracts, including reduced use of Fixed Term Contracts and more effective ability to issue contracts with unallocated FTE (e.g., non-module Tuition Related Activity) in the initial contract.
This branch notes
The new Associate Lecturer (AL) Contract negotiated in 2018, explicitly recognised the principle of no detriment for all ALs, including those working at over 1.3 FTE. Specifically the 2018 agreement said the following about this situation:
Managing ALs with greater than One FTE of AL work
Despite this, OU management are now proposing to remove all work over 1.3 FTE from all ALs with OU contracts totally more than 1.3 FTE, by use of the fire and rehire tactic last used by P & O to replace their workforce with workers on a lower wage. This clearly breaches the no detriment and natural staff turnover aspects of the 2018 agreement as outlined above. ALs are extremely angry that some of their number are being singled out for treatment that is clearly in breach of the 2018 agreement. ALs are extremely angry that Staff Tutors/Student Experience Managers (STs/SEMs) are being potentially asked to implement this ‘fire/rehire’ policy even though many are clearly unhappy about this and ALs send their full solidarity to STs/SEMs on this issue.
This branch believes:
This branch resolves:
This meeting notes staff reaction to management proposals to reduce FTE for those above 1.3FTE, and that many affected staff had taken on the extra work to help the university out in the past.
This meeting also notes that:
It comes hard on the heels after the uncertainty and disruption at the start of our academic year caused by 100% group sizes.
It also takes place against a backdrop of problems caused by under-resourcing of the Skills Audit and Workload Management System (WMS), key elements in AL contract implementation.
This meeting expresses concern about the priorities of the OU senior leadership and their ability to lead the university.
Motion 1 - Workers Summit model motion
This branch has been inspired by the wave of industrial action that has taken place over the last two years in response to the cost-of-living crisis. We believe that as the strike movement has developed, different questions have arisen within it. We believe there is a desperate need for a more coordinated campaign against the government, with unions striking and marching together. We also believe there is a need to reflect on the “deals” that come our way and discuss ways that bad deals can be roundly rejected. We take heart from the RCN vote to reject the pay deal from government and note the key role of NHS Workers Say No as a key force in that vote.
We believe there are further questions about the best strategy to win, including the question of escalating the strike action and what that escalation should look like. We resolve to support the “Workers Summit” event, currently called by Lambeth and Hackney NEU, NHS Workers Say No and Strike Map, in London on the 23rd September. We commit paying £200 towards the cost of the event and we commit to sending 2 delegates, paying for their transport costs where necessary.
Motion 2 - Tutor groups at least 100% size
This meeting notes with concern the decision by senior management that all tutor groups will be at least 100% size in the coming academic year. This meeting believes this will cause operational difficulties and will be bad for students and staff. This meeting asks the university management to reconsider this decision.
Motion 3 – Amazon workers’ industrial action
This branch notes:
This branch believes:
This branch resolves:
Motion 2 - Supporting the Postgraduate Researchers (PGRs) as Staff campaign, opposing use of fixed-term contracts by UCU
OU UCU Branch Notes:
Notes furthermore:
Branch Resolves:
Amendment to Motion 4 - The 'Campus 2030' Project
In recent communications the VC has indicated that the university will undertake a business case over the next 9-12 months regarding a new central Milton Keynes campus. Originally there were two separate projects: a review of MK sites and exploration of a face-to-face teaching campus, which is something the university has previously rejected. These are now one proposal to sell Walton Hall, move to Central Milton Keynes and build a teaching campus. The OU will hire an external 'Chief Operating Officer' to oversee the development of the business case.
The branch notes that:
This branch resolves to direct the Executive Committee to:
Motion 5 – Support for Branches on Strike or Facing Punitive MAB Deductions
This branch notes that a number of our sibling branches are taking action against compulsory redundancies and/or are facing unprecedented threats of pay docking for the marking and assessment boycott.
This branch directs the Executive Committee to send and publicise messages of support and donations to local hardship funds as appropriate.
This branch notes with dismay that Congress 2023 has been overshadowed by controversy and division over motions relating to the war in Ukraine, which have caused some members to leave the union or to consider doing so.
This branch affirms its commitments to the main principles of Congress Motion 6 with one addition, in point 2. This branch:
This branch resolves to:
Model motion on OU’s abuse of Fixed Term Contracts (FTCs) for research-only staff
Purpose
For research-only staff, the OU’s abuse of Fixed Term Contracts (FTCs) has been revealed by much anecdotal evidence and by its own official figures. Towards improving the OU’s practices, this model motion is meant for all academic units. Staff could circulate this motion to the list-serve of their academic unit. The motion would be more effective if taken up in parallel at many levels (Centres, Schools, Departments and Faculties); smaller units could forward their motion to larger ones.
The UCU branch would like to know about plans for such an agenda item and about any outcomes. Please send info to ucu@open.ac.uk, Subject header ‘Researchers on FTCs’.
MODEL MOTION for academic units - Let’s stop the OU’s abuse of Fixed Term Contracts (FTCs) for research-only staff
The OU UCU branch asks academic units (and sub-units) to discuss and approve this motion.
This meeting asks the branch Executive Committee to support members who raise the issues below within their academic units.
Whereas UK universities have been churning research staff
The term ‘research-only staff’ denotes employment contracts which stipulate only research responsibilities, though such staff may volunteer for other tasks such as teaching. UK research-only staff are predominantly on Fixed Term Contracts (FTCs). The 2002 Fixed Term Work Regulations limit the renewal of a FTC beyond 4 continuous years, after which it should be made open-ended, unless the employer can justify ‘objective reasons’ to the contrary. In many UK universities or in some academic units there, ‘objective reasons’ have featured spurious criteria, such as the source of previous funding.
Moreover, OU management has avoided or pre-empted that procedure by signalling well beforehand that a FTC will not be renewed, thus incentivising the researcher to seek other options and to leave post before the contract ends, often before the research project ends.
When more research staff are needed, new staff are employed on an FTC, thus regularly ‘churning’ them. In many cases research staff could have been retained to carry out ongoing or future work, e.g., generated by research bids.
In some other cases, research-only staff are employed on FTCs beyond 4 years but are denied access to an open-ended contract, even when their skills are relevant to ongoing research work.
For a national overview, see the 2017 UCU report.
By abusing FTCs in all those ways, universities undermine career development, research continuity and prospects to raise external funds.
Whereas the OU has been likewise churning research staff
Such abuse of FTCs has been widespread at the OU. It has approx. 67% of its research staff on FTCs. Although that figure has declined somewhat in recent years, many have left before their contract ended, knowing that it will not be renewed beyond 4 years. Few FTCs have become open-ended contracts. (See February 2023 People Services report). The indicators are consistent with management practices churning research staff.
In some cases, the OU management pressure has been blatant: Before employing a researcher on a research project, a PI was required to sign a prior undertaking not to re-employ the researcher beyond that contract.
A 2019 OU document undertook. to reduce the numbers remaining on FTCs beyond 4 years. This indicator has served as the official ‘success measure’ for implementing the Researcher Development Concordat (RDC), supposedly by improving employment stability. The ‘success measure’ instead has disguised the OU management’s practices getting rid of such researchers before 4 years.
Therefore this academic unit resolves that the OU should:
Finally, this academic unit asks other units to approve and circulate the model motion.
This branch notes the Court of Appeal has agreed to hear an appeal in the lawsuit brought by Dr Neil Davies and Dr Ewan McGoughey along with c 6,600 USS members against the directors of USS. Case update – Save pensions and the planet (savepensionsandplanet.org).
The original suit covered 4 claims: the charge of mishandling the valuation in March 2020; the equality implications for women, young people and ethnic minorities of changes to benefits and contributions; failure to control management costs; and the failure to divest from fossil fuels.
This branch therefore resolves to:
AL Community and Representation
This meeting notes:
This meeting asks branch officers and reps to be mindful of the connection between (1), (2) and (3) above, and oppose the untimely winding up of ALA/ALE and any attempt to close down the ALCR.
STRIKE DATES
This branch notes:
This branch believes:
This branch resolves:
INTERNATIONAL WOMEN’S DAY
On International Women's Day, and with a continuing gender pay gap in the institution, the branch notes with grave concern that some parts of the university are citing financial pressures to propose the suspension of Athena Swan applications and other EDI initiatives. We call upon the Vice Chancellor and the Deputy Vice Chancellor to recommit to the university's ongoing work on Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, and to affirm that they will not treat the institutional financial situation as a means to cut work in support of staff who would thus be doubly disadvantaged.
Title: Strengthening Bargaining & Negotiations through collectively developing our decarbonisation campaign
Congress Believes
Congress Resolves
This Branch utterly condemns the heavy-handed and unacceptable policing of respectable republican protests surrounding the recent monarchical events.
The use of state repression to punish dissenting views is totally unacceptable and a threat to pluralist democracy in the UK
Motion 1
This branch believes:
That good communications are essential in supporting any strategy to bring in new activist members.
Therefore resolves:
In order to support the work of the newly formed Communications Group, we should trial the role of Communications Lead on the Executive Committee. In this period, their role would be to work with the Comms Group and to support other Exec Committee officers, particularly the President and Honorary Secretary, and the Branch Administrator, in issuing timely internal and external communication to members, and managing the production of appropriate newsletters to staff groups, and social media for the branch. This role will be reviewed after a year.
Motion 2 - Stress, Workload, and Wellbeing at the OU
This branch notes the recent results of the Staff Barometer Survey, the impact of stress on all staff categories, and the fact that excessive workload and associated problems have not improved since this branch’s Workload Survey in 2018.
We call upon the Open University to:
This branch notes that the employers’ organisation UCEA and the OU have refused to make a pay offer in line with inflation, after real-terms pay losses since 2009. At present the pay offer stands at 3% for 2022-2023 while inflation is 9.1% CPI at June 2022 as prices continue to rise. This branch notes that the VC highlights fairness and staff wellbeing as key university values. We note further that other universities have agreed to make one-off payments in 2021/22 to help staff with the rise in energy and living costs.
We call upon the university to:
Donations and solidarity for UCU branches taking action
This branch notes that a number of HE and FE branches will be taking action in the coming months and authorises the Branch Committee to make appropriate donations to local hardship funds.
This branch also notes that some HE branches will soon be taking action over the Four Fights and (depending on HESC decisions) over USS. These branches will be taking action over national disputes on behalf of branches which cannot take action this time as a result of anti-trade union legislation.
This meeting asks the branch executive committee to consider making donations up to a total amount similar to that we would expect to spend if the OU UCU branch were taking action.
This meeting also asks the executive committee to organise support for branches taking action by publicising and supporting their rallies and other events, fund raising, and other practical support.
Higher Education Careers Services: informing students and supporting the low carbon economy - for the HE Sector Conference
HE conference notes:
HE conference resolves:
This General Meeting agrees to the setting up of a local hardship fund to supplement the national UCU fighting fund during any industrial action over USS pensions or over pay this academic year. The purpose of the fund will be to support branch members who face hardship, as a result of lost pay during the industrial action.
This meeting authorises:
The transfer of an initial sum of £50,000 from local branch funds into the hardship fund and asks the branch executive to set up a process for members to access the fund in accordance with national UCU guidance.
The branch committee to seek to increase the hardship fund further by asking for donations, to the extent that this is practically possible.
Any money remaining in the hardship fund at the end of the action should be transferred back into our local branch funds, leaving a token amount to keep the account active.
Motion 2
This meeting notes:
That like the OU, Goldsmiths has in the past prided itself on a commitment to lifelong learning and to broaden access to higher education.
The ongoing threat of redundancies amongst academic and professional services staff at Goldsmiths.
That this is one of several ongoing attacks on arts and humanities funding by British universities.
That by denying the Goldsmiths UCU branch (GUCU) officers proper payment for facility time, Goldsmiths management are undermining the legally-recognised collective consultation process.
That GUCU has just secured an overwhelming mandate for industrial action in an informal ballot.
That other institutions, notably Chester and Liverpool, have fought off schemes for compulsory redundancies via the threat of industrial action.
It resolves:
To declare publicly our solidarity with our comrades at Goldsmiths.
To ask our members to support GUCU’s online #NoJobCuts campaign and
to approve the donation of £500 from OUBUCU branch funds to support their campaigning.
Motion on ALCCP briefing
This meeting notes the proposed misuse of AL Academic Currency time, and low overall pay for new ALs starting this October and considers these to be unacceptable.
Proposed amendment to the motion
This meeting notes the proposed misuse of AL Academic Currency and Professional Development time, and low overall pay for new ALs starting this October and considers these to be unacceptable.
Overwriting the self-directed part of AL Academic Currency time with other work is equivalent to the cancellation of study leave for academic staff. Overwriting the agreed Professional Development and Academic Currency time is equivalent to asking ALs not to read course materials that they are about to teach. Crucially, overwriting either the AL-led Academic Currency time or the Agreed Professional Development and Academic Currency time with Mandatory training is contrary to the purpose of the former two and directly contrary to the negotiated policy on 'AL Professional Development and Academic Currency' which states that neither the 6 days pro-rata for AL-led AC time nor the 1 + 5 days pro rata for Agreed PD and AC time are to be used for Mandatory training (e.g., IT training, Prevent, etc.)
The OU made a commitment that no AL would be financially worse off due to the delay in implementing the new AL contract. This is breached by overwriting Professional Development and Academic Currency time with other work. This especially applies to new ALs in 21J since three half days' induction are for IT training which they should be paid for since they are unlikely to have any spare FTE.
When it comes to module briefings, if these are taken to be included in the 1+ 5 days of Agreed PD and AC time, it would entail that the majority of ALs have no time left for the rest of the year to engage in further professional development. If anything further is needed (attending SD days, getting up to speed on a new module, etc.), this would need to be paid for over and above their FTE unless they have other unused FTE. As things stand, there is no indicated intention to cover this with additional payments.
This branch supports the negotiators in pursuing this matter through negotiation, arbitration, or by lodging a dispute if necessary.
View the ALCCP briefing.
View the agreed policy balloted on in 2019.
This policy is cited in Section 19 of the new AL Terms and Conditions, and the current AL Terms and Conditions also have caveats on the use of staff development time in Section 9c.
This branch notes the ongoing dispute over the USS valuation, plans developed by UUK for unjustified and substantial cuts to pension benefits, and the refusal of USS to divest from fossil fuels.
Kings College London UCU and other branches are fundraising to explore legal action against the USS Trustees on several potential grounds (see: Save university pensions, and save the planet (crowdjustice.com). This initiative has support from UCU negotiators and is intended to complement any action undertaken by national UCU.
The branch calls upon the Executive Committee to publicise this fundraising effort to members and to make an initial contribution of £500 to this fund.
Motion
Motion - Staff Tutor's/Student Experience Manager's Claim
This meeting endorses the claim for Staff Tutors and Student Experience Managers in the appendix to the EGM agenda, and asks our Executive committee and ST/SEM negotiators to negotiate with the university on the basis of this claim, and to do what is necessary to pursue it.
Motion 1 - Proceed with claim
The meeting endorses the attached claim for mitigation and compensation for Associate Lecturers following the decision by VCE to delay implementation of the new AL contract.
This meeting authorises the OU UCU negotiators and executive committee to negotiate with management on the basis of this claim, to make any necessary additions, and to enter a dispute with the university in the event of failure to agree, and if necessary to take the initial steps required to organise legal industrial action.
This meeting also authorises the OU UCU executive committee and ST/SEM negotiators to draft a claim on behalf of staff tutors, addressing workload and related stress, and the need for proper systems and support, and to take any necessary measures to pursue it.
This meeting authorises the executive committee to use up to £20,000 of OU branch funds in support of the claims referred to in this motion.
Motion 2 - Support for AL Members in Case of Strike Action
This meeting notes there is massive support for the ongoing decasualisation process among all categories of OU staff. OUBUCU members in all roles are dismayed at the news that the timetable towards the new contract is being abandoned, with often severe financial consequences to individuals. Members wish to demonstrate practical solidarity with those who are forced to threaten industrial action in response. An injury to one is an injury to all.
This meeting asks the Branch Committee to establish an active appeal for the Hardship Fund, in order to make it clear to AL members that they will receive financial support to compensate for hardship resulting from any industrial action, should this be necessary in support of the new contract and the 'no detriment' principle.
This appeal will be aimed at non-AL members in the branch and could involve pledges to the branch Hardship Fund that will be activated only should industrial action prove necessary over this issue.
This meeting notes that the University Secretary of the Open University, as chair of the AL Contract Delivery Board, on Monday 21 March 2021 announced a delay to the implementation of the AL Contract after more than two years of work. As context this meeting notes:
Given these failures this meeting states that it has no confidence in the University Secretary. There must be a formal review of VCE actions and decision-making that have led to this situation.
Phone us on 01908 6(53069) or Deb Shann on Skype for Business or Teams
Call into Room 015, Wilson C block, Walton Hall