Following a slide show outlining what had happened so far and the Union's position on the redundancies, staff were asked for any comments and questions. Note the slide show is available on the UCUS Website for those who could not attend the EGM.
All contributions from the floor were highly critical of management's proposals. Not one person spoke in favour of the 'headroom' strategy or the proposed redundancy plan. Below are some of the points raised in discussion:
- Is it possible that staff will take severance and then there will be restaffing at a later date, given that posts are supposed to be made redundant not people the assumption is that people cannot be made redundant and then be replaced by cheaper staff?
It has been made clear that this will not happen. The proposal is to make savings by making people redundant, not by replacing them with cheaper staff.
- Has the University looked at other ways of saving money? Would it be possible to make savings through removing the extra layers of management created through the doubling up of Schools and Faculties?
- It appears to staff that these cuts are intended to fund the prestigious investment in Media City UK which looks to be costing £13M. The cuts to administrative staff will add further to the workload of academic staff. There also seems to be a move towards more hourly paid staff who are cheaper. Would it be sensible to involve students in any campaign, as this will impact on their quality of education?
- Whilst staff are worried about the proposed voluntary severance and don't want to stop this for those who want to go, they are concerned about the overworking. It is clear that people want to go because they are unhappy here, and the redundancies will only make things worse for those who stay.
- The deadlines for VS appear to be rather short and there is concern that the timescale for Compulsory Redundancy takes place before the expiry of the 90 days' consultation that we are legally entitled to? What is happening about this?
The Full Time Officer is coming on Monday to clarify the situtation on this and other issues relating to the redundancies.
- How can there be consultation when we have been given no definite facts or figures regarding the University's financial situation and the savings required? We don't even know how much it costs to teach a student. It is impossible to challenge the cuts without this information. Other cost information people are interested in receiving includes:
- School of Languages privatisation has been put on hold for the time being. This needs to bekept in mind, as it could be used to get rid of Languages staff under TUPE to a private organisation. There is concern that privatisation is to be introduced in other areas, ie Estates and ILS.
- How many managers are being made redundant? Many areas appear top heavy with management. In ILS one management position is not being filled and the management is making a big deal out of this particular saving. However, it is frontline staff who are taking the brunt of the cuts and therefore services across the University will be cut. There appears to be little we can do about this, management claim they are consulting us, but our opinions are being dismissed and not listened to. Decisions have already been made, this makes a mockery of any concept of consultation.
- There is a need to ensure that the criteria for redundancy are clear.
- Why is the VC driving this through when there is a new VC starting next year?
- How voluntary is voluntary? Many people see it as unemployment, there are a lot of female staff affected by this who have not been in post very long and who have returned to work following breaks in service, this is a particular issue for CHSSC. Many people feel as though they sould go before they are pushed, especially in the targeted areas. There appears to be no difference between CR and VR if a post is targeted and there is only one person in that post. This is a big issue in ILS, where generic job descriptions are being used to make cuts, yet these descriptions do not really reflect what people are actually doing.
- There should be a consultative ballot on potential action over any possible Compulsory Redundancies, a line needs to be drawn. The ballot needs to include all unions.
- VS should be opened up to the whole University before staff are made compulsorily redundant to allow more bumping and redeployment.
- The cost of refurbishing the Old Firestation
- The growth in staff of central areas
-VC/PVC/SLT salaries
- Refurbishment of Acton Square
- Cost of ROV
-Are the redundancies being used to fund the October pay rise?
The Unions have asked for an extra 30 days on the consultation period because some financial information is not likely to be made available until mid-November, yet the timeline has not been changed for consultation on redundancies.
- we should strongly oppose the redundancy proposals using the consultative procedure.
- any attempt at compulsory redundancy should be fought using any means including industrial action.
