When do you think the strikes will be?

[JasminaPashmina]

Just that - when do you think the strikes will happen?

Before Christmas by chance?

I also thought the ‘Miss Grady’ instead of ‘Dr Grady’ was out of order, and yes, of course, it’s the Daily Mail. Her relationship to another UCU official was used to create the impression of a nepotistic union culture.

In the past, I have taken industrial action. Some academics accept that that means you’re not available via email but many secretly or not so secretly think you should just get on with your research during your ‘time off’ and get annoyed if you don’t reply to emails, don’t meet deadlines etc. It’s all about keeping up appearances (in other contexts, too) which is maybe why we have such a huge problem with mental health in the sector.

Yeah, I am no fan of the DM and the article was misogynistic, but am slightly sick of someone who is apparently running a campaign against fatcats being paid inflated salaries being paid an inflated salary herself. I wonder if the UCU would give the information away if a FOI request were made. Either way, it's got to be well into the 6 figures and I think it's hypocritical to criticise universities' numbers of staff who get paid in excess of 100k when one gets paid more than that oneself. I mean what is the justification for her getting more than MPs for instance?

As for the digital picket, I honestly can't see what the difference is between tweeting about the awesome teach-out where you presented your brand new book or showcased the results of your funded project, and tweeting a link to published research. If you're active on twitter, you're keeping up your profile, no matter what you tweet about. In fact, some of the strike tweets are hugely increasing the visibility of certain academics, which might actually help their academic profile.

Like you say about the emails, I have also had contact with lots of people 'on strike' who are picking up emails. Of course loads of them are using it for research. Also, all the teach-outs that have slides, involve discussions about books and articles, or other elements of research (ie most of them) actually help raise the profile and visibility of the university's research, so it's massively counter-productive. The fact that you move your planned event to a different venue and label it a teach-out means nothing.

Agree completely about Grady's salary. I wonder what the justification would be... that the job is stressful, that the job has huge responsibilities, that the job is head of a massive organisation, that the salary is in line with the private sector? This doesn't half sound like similar justifications of VC salaries

On the issue of the digital picket, I completely agree about boosting profiles of academics. I also wanted to add that for many in social sciences and humanities, the boundary between work and personal interest is incredibly fuzzy and permeable so I see a lot of people tweeting about interesting 'non-work' stuff (say a TV show on BBC4) but which is interesting to them, and their followers, because of the work that they do.

If a feminist scholar tweets about a news story on women's rights, is that work or not? Again, complete silence would be a proper digital picket and avoid these messy questions.

On the subject of "fatcat" salaries, I think there's also a lot of demagoguery there too from some UCU types and branches... I do think that there should be a cap on senior management salaries, but out of a sense of "fairness" (i.e. when the salary of a VC is more than 20 times that of a part-time precarious teaching fellow, it's not particularly good for morale) rather than rather than for purely practical reasons if you know what I mean. Senior management teams tend to be by definition small and it's not as if capping their salaries at e.g. 100k will mean a significant pay rise for everyone else or lots of permanent contracts for precarious researchers. The money would have to come from somewhere else.

At the moment, I’m completely silent on social media. I may not be striking myself but I respect my colleagues’ right to do so and don’t want to undermine them if I can avoid it. Not sure this will get me any brownie points though ...

Another thought: if Grady hadn’t been so present on twitter during the 2018 strikes, her profile wouldn’t have been anywhere near high enough to get elected as GS. She had next to no union experience. So the ‘digital picket line’ can do wonders for your career if you do it right.

arid I agree that the monetary impact of cutting VC salaries wouldn’t be huge. Also agree that it’s unfair and inappropriate to pay them that much but it’s not the reason why there isn’t money to go around for others.

And Daca totally agree with you about how the strike-tweeting was absolutely instrumental in getting Jo Grady her job. It worked out very well for her on that front. Also agree that there is a crossover in social sciences between work and personal interest. Note also that Jo Grady’s area of expertise in academia was labour relations, so her tweets were definitely linked to her own research and boosted her profile.

@Daca You're absolutely right, I hadn't thought of it that way. Good old digital picket line, eh?

www.timeshighereducation.com/news/stand-both-sides-dig-uk-sector-strikes

This article suggests that participation is down since November. In my dept, there are a few of us not striking. There are some militant ones as well but I have managed to ignore them by working at home a lot.

For those of you who are still members, I think tomorrow is the last day to vote in the NEC elections. There are a lot of people standing who would be seriously bad for academic freedom and for feminist scholars so I really hope none of them are elected.

Not surprised that participation is down - since 2018 there have been over 25 strike days! It’s time for a resolution. I’m awaiting the outcome of the NEC elections, and if the results are disappointing, then may really be time to leave.

I think there’s been a bit of movement since that article was published.

Is the movement on pensions or pay?

I mean this is what we’re looking at in terms of pensions:

A person on a salary of £50,000 will lose £2098 in pay from 22 days of striking.
There can’t be a long term or indefinite deal on pensions at this stage because another valuation is due later this year. You won’t get an employer to commit to a long term figure when it doesn’t know what the valuation will say.

The difference in pay between paying 9.6% and 8% for someone on 50k is £46 per month loss of net salary. It will take 45 months of that to recoup the loss from the strike. You’re only looking at getting an agreement to freeze contributions until maybe 2021, not nearly 4 years. The USS offered 9.1% in September but it was never put to the union members.

I guess the answer is what, realistically, are you hoping for in terms of a pensions offer, bearing in mind that an upcoming valuation is likely to move the goalposts and require new negotiations?

And how much further strike action are you prepared to take if this round is unsuccessful?

Finally, bearing in mind that pension contributions are an expense for the employer and they are also facing a hike in contributions, what incentive is there for the employers (rather than the scheme itself) to seek a higher overall rate of contributions, as UCU seems to think is the case. Wouldn’t the employers have been pushing for a lower overall rate of contributions, as it will keep their bill down?

If you’re in doubt, this is so different to the 2018 strike which was a proposed move from DB to DC which would have cost most people tens if not hundreds of thousands. This is not what the current pension dispute is about.

But I’d be interested to hear about the movement in the negotiations.

Both. Talks have reopened with UUK and UCEA, both being described as “positive and constructive”. Waiting to see what emerges.

@Pota2 not sure those calculations are really representative as while that is the gross loss in terms of salary deduction, some will be offset on net terms by tax adjustments, strike pay and (where available) from local branch hardship fund. In my case for example I earn 43k, and initial 8 days resulted in a net loss to me of £200. So I anticipate a net loss of around £600 from all 22 days (and that's without considering things like not spending money on commuting when not working). So for me the short Vs long term losses is a no brainer.

But... It is hard to be on strike again. I hope it will be worth it.

Interestingly, I always assumed that, as someone in a permanent, well-paid contract, I shouldn't claim from the hardship fund unless I was really in dire need (like, about to be evicted or something like that). Even though the fund has guidelines for people earning under and over 30k, lots of "unofficial" communications from UCU (e.g. on Twitter) imply that we "well-paid" types should give precedence to people on precarious contracts (which is fair enough) and actually donate to the fund instead of claiming from it. But maybe it's just me who reads it this way.

Miljetmum I am basing those figures on not making a claim on the hardship fund. As aridapricot notes, I also thought the fund was mainly intended for low paid or precarious staff. When I was on strike in Nov and Dec last year, I made no claim for this reason.

As for the idea that the benefits will outweigh the sacrifice, I think a lot of people aren’t aware that the argument is about the contributions until Oct 2021 and the fact that a new valuation is coming this year. Did you realise that even if the employers do agree to keep contributions to 8%, you will only just break even and maybe even make a loss from striking, despite claiming from the fund? I get the impression that lots of people think this is still about the DB to DC proposal which it isn’t.

The only truly concrete part of the 4 fights is on pay, where they are proposing a substantial hike in salary that a) they won’t get an agreement on and b) will particularly benefit the higher paid staff. The combined added expenditure of pay increases for all and frozen pension contributions will of course swallow up cash that could be spent on improving things for precarious staff.

Obviously it seems that many still have faith in the UCU and their tactics and I hope a satisfactory resolution is reached. I am just increasingly convinced that it won’t and am concerned about the impact this will have had on people who struggled to afford to strike in the first place.

Well indeed I absolutely could not afford to strike without access to the hardship fund. I know I am lucky to have perm job now but I have zero savings and in fact debts still to pay off from my last mat leave while on precarious contracts and have no partner income to buffer me. In my institution some people are paying into the hardship funds in lieu of striking which is also an unusual position to my mind.

For me it just feels like not striking against the uni due to impact on students is kind of like staying in a bad marriage for the sake of not wanting to disrupt children with moving out. I don't think the union line is perfect by any means, but they have taken care of me and so I am happy to take the action they ask for in return.

Yes, paying in while not striking has no impact whatsoever on the employers. They are only affected by numbers on strike and all the people on research contracts who say them striking makes no difference are actually impeding the strike action.

I went on strike for 7 of 8 days last semester and didn’t claim from the fund. I felt obligated to strike. Then I left the union over this and other things because I know they definitely don’t have my back, so have not been taking part in this round.

I think if you know what the dispute is about and support the UCU position, you should strike but the number of people I’ve spoken to who think this is still about DB vs DC and that they’re arguing over hundreds of thousands rather than about 40 quid a month for 18 months, after which it’s all up in the air again is staggering.

Thanks, Pota, for laying it out so clearly.

Boom! Jo Grady has just tweeted her support for the woman who got Selina Todd de-platformed from a conference she helped put on at Oxford. You’d think she’d have something better to do on the eve of a third week of strike action but it seems like she just can’t resist a bit of academic bullying ...

Yes, I saw that. I am disgusted but not surprised. She also sent a subtweet about how bullies play the victim, which was quite clearly aimed at Selina. She’s a disgrace and should resign imo.

I saw one person had questioned what the UUK and UCEA negotiators must think when they see her absolutely childish and brain dead social media feed. I totally agree. It’s embarrassing.

Can’t remember if I posted this on here. Apologies if so. But as you can see, it’s just one big game to her. Not people’s livelihoods at stake by being on the picket line, some of whom are going into debt for this. Just about lipstick and being cute-as-hell. This is all so depressing.

And a lovely bit of ageism as well with the OK Boomer sign

‘OK boomer’ is even more tragic when you think about the fact that it’s older academics on higher salaries and with bigger pension pots who stand to benefit most from the ongoing strike action. Older academics are also more likely to have grant-based teaching but-outs ...
But even if Grady resigns, will that change anything???

That is true. The boomers will do particularly well from the strike.

I don’t know what will happen if she resigns and I don’t think she actually will. It’s just my personal belief that she is not in a position where she should lead a large trade union if this is her reaction to serious concerns. I also don’t think she has the faintest clue about some of the sacrifices that workers are making for her decision to take them on strike. To call it a ‘game’ seems insulting and to send Oprah gifs in response to serious questions about academic freedom reminds me of something a teenager would do.

I guess at the end of next week, there will need to be some serious thinking done, given that there can’t be any more strikes before the mandate expires. So they will need to convince people to vote for action again. I hope people will seek some answers from the leadership rather than just accepting whatever is said because it’s got a catchy hashtag attached to it.