When do you think the strikes will be?

[JasminaPashmina]

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

Before Christmas by chance?

I think this one definitely thinks it is

Yes, that may be part of the problem. Really frustrated by this, as I would like to have the interests of HE workers represented but it feels as if all I am getting is spin, distortion of facts and pointless slogans. If the sector is hit by external shocks such as a pandemic or maybe even a Tory government which has, for the past decade, actually been quite indulgent of HE, then we can’t afford this.

Yeah you're completely right, I don't feel the need to tow the party line. My student was really grateful to chat informally and critically about the strikes with me (sent an email afterwards to this affect) because all she's getting from other staff is bullshit about solidarity. But we're meant to be instilling critical thinking and questioning the taken-for-granted in our students (I'm social sciences) so I don't get this whole approach of just expecting students to go along with it blindly.

It feels less like a political party and more like a cult.

I've basically muted everyone I follow on Twitter and it's fabulous.

Thank you all, by the way, for being on this board. It gives me the courage to voice my concerns IRL.

Yes completely agree @JasminaPashmina. What I see is that any student who voices criticism in social media is dismissed by a bunch of hardliners as being conservative, neoliberal, thinking that education is a commercial product, etc (tbf many of the students in question do seem to come from those kinds of ideological quarters). So their views are dismissed as not that of "real" students, who should of course wholeheartedly support the strike. My sense is that a lot of students do (or at least are not too bothered) simply because lecturers have gone out of their way to minimize the impact of the strikes for them, rewriting assignment questions to make them easier, offering tutorials and extra support on non-strike days. In my department some of the most vocal union supporters have also been the most active not only in doing this, but also in encouraging others to do the same. Tbf I did it to an extent (last semester, when I was teaching), because like most lecturers I don't want to disadvantage students or use then as pawns in a dispute, but then you wonder what the strike is really for, as teaching is the area where the strike could hurt the university the most.

(I understand it's not the same everywhere though, in accredited degrees you cannot simply change the content of a course or make it easier, etc.)

Daca no problem. It’s a refreshing change from being told you’re a traitor, a moron, a neoliberal etc.

arid I think it’s been a weird combination of trying to minimise disruption but keeping going for so long that it probably is causing some disruption now, but because relatively few academics are striking, it’s causing the ones who are affected to feel singled out. If you were doing a dissertation supervised by someone on strike you’d be screwed whereas if your supervisor wasn’t striking, you’d be okay. That sort of thing is bound to cause resentment and more so than if they were all in the same boat.

Just seen that my ex-branch is planning a big demonstration at the student halls of residence. What’s the point of that? It isn’t enough to disrupt teaching but now they want to disrupt the students’ private study? I must be missing something.

Desperation? Asking students politely to support the strike?

Even better, the demo is at 8am. I find waking teenagers up at what they regard as the crack of dawn is the best way to get them inside.

Same branch has just rejected a motion on supporting free speech on women’s issues. Glad I left.

Onside not inside!

8 am is really out of order. Wonder how many people will turn up.

How pathetic. Shouldn’t they be protesting in front of the VC’s office instead? What do the students have to do with this?

I think, reading the email again, that they are targeting a meeting the principal is chairing at the conference centre, which is in the middle of the halls. So maybe that makes some sense.

So the ballot for more strikes will go out on March 17? I can barely believe it. This strike has achieved nothing and yet they expect more strikes...
Communication has been poor, too...

Wow, they’re doing another ballot? Bloody hell. That’s brave. I wonder whether they will get a mandate this time. There’s a lot of people who have convinced themselves that this is the right action to take and have already lost a lot of pay, so might tell themselves to keep going.

Interesting (yet dispiriting) thread by Mike Otsuka... twitter.com/MikeOtsuka/status/1236998626674724864

I used to think there was no way the UCU could obtain another mandate, but now I'm starting to dread another ballot. A lot of the sensible people likely to vote no on industrial action (but perhaps yes on ASOS) must have left by now. Those who see the strike as yet another opportunity to show how though they are (Jo Grady included) will vote yes of course, but I'm also starting to think that a lot of people who have become secretly disillusioned with the strikes will still vote yes, so as to persuade themselves that they were right after all and if they keep striking indefinitely surely at some point something will be achieved.

I fear they might get a mandate too. Even though the effects of the strike where I am are very minimal. Part of the problem is that they have the USS dispute and the four fights - five issues on the table - impossible surely to sort all five in one go.

Particularly when they're contradictory in sense that a win on one would negatively impact another....

Thanks, that’s an interesting thread by Mike. I agree that the UCU position on pensions seems uninformed and unrealistic. I can’t see employers agreeing to it, no matter how many strike days they call.

The best case scenario (if you dread further strikes) is that the ballot goes out but the 50% threshold is not reached. If you are in UCU and against further strikes, not voting instead of voting no might be the better option.

I'm definitely not voting. I hope enough people understand that it's better tactically to not vote than to vote no....

Definitely better not to vote. I know it’s taking advantage of anti-TU laws but it seems to be the only way to stop the UCU driving through this insane action.

Not that I need to worry about this, not being a member anymore.

Does anyone know when the NEC results are announced? I know a bunch of people who were giving UCU one last chance to see if any sensible people were elected.

I don't know. I voted very carefully in those.

I'm still teetering on the brink of leaving UCU....

I voted last time instead of abstaining because I was fooled by the "not denying other people your vote" line that several of Jo Grady's supporters spouted, but I won't be falling for this again. I suppose it's a gamble whether voting no or not voting might be more effective, as each university will be different and also the climate when the next ballot comes round, after 22 days of strikes, will be different from past ballots so it's impossible to predict behaviours. Still, I'm guessing that, while some people will vote yes no matter what, there won't be enough of them to reach 50% total turnout. And my sense is that if someone is pro-union generally but sceptic about a new round of strikes, they'd abstain rather than vote no, as they might regard the latter as more "anti-union". A significant number will also be indifferent and not bother voting of course...

I don’t think it’s denying others the right to vote. At the end of the day, if you can’t get 50% of members to cast a vote, you can’t strike. There clearly isn’t a majority of members who actively support the strike (even where the threshold is reached), so I don’t think it’s undemocratic for it not to go ahead.

There’s also the fact that only about a third of union members even strike so that means 70% abstain, despite the apparent huge support for it.