My heart is not in this latest university strike....

[JadeDay]

There are lots of reasons, everything from the fact I'm still picking up the fall out of work from the last strike, to just not having the physical and mental the energy to strike this time around. My institution are striking on the inequalities issue, an issue I highly support, but do not feel striking is the way to solve it. My students are tired and struggling, and the only people we seem to punish are ourselves and them. The political discussion in my department is just toxic on this, agressively turning on those who don't/won't strike whilst chanting a narrative about all coming together. I've witnessed the worst bullying I have ever seen all in light of this action which is supposed to promote inclusion and equality! Whilst I agree with the cause I don't want to align myself with the hardliner narrative of 'you're either with us or against us.' I love my job, I love my students, I support the ideals of the action, but the way it is playing out.... well as the title says, my heart just isn't in it.

Yes, £60k is not huge and VC pay is a joke. But I'm doing the same job, and often more of it, as those on £60k for less than half of that and no job security. While I'm doing their research and writing their modules not one of them has ever noted that inequality.

Agree with you Pota it's also the structure. But attitudes help keep that structure in place.

I totally agree that VC salaries are crazy and not justified by the way.

But someone on 60k talking of needing to strike due to poor pay when their earnings are in the top 10 or even 5 per cent of salaries? That won’t inspire sympathy. Lecturers, SLS, readers and profs are NOT badly paid.

FaFoutis I honestly think some of them don’t make the connection. I saw one person write that she was so overworked and that she only got respite when she got a 1 million grant and was bought out of teaching for 4 years. She said she wanted all junior staff to get that same opportunity that she did, seemingly not realising that buyout is only possible if there are precarious staff stepping in to take it on.

A lot of it is just simple economics. Me sitting at home doing nothing but writing articles for some obscure social science journal will only work if I’ve got money from outside. Otherwise, I am not contributing much to the university in terms of doing the teaching and admin that keeps it going. There are many many academics who don’t think they should do any or much teaching, not realising that if they don’t, it falls to precarious staff because not everyone can be permanent.

I agree it's systemic, but some immediate things could be done like getting rid of ZHC (except perhaps where they're requested) and putting people on fractional contracts; paying properly for the hours spent on prep and marking. Personally I don't mind people pointing out the impact of the salary freeze, even if they're higher up. I'd like people who are highly trained, skilled and specialist to be paid well. These are proper, professional jobs with a lot of responsibility that (hopefully) add useful new knowledge. I'd like that to be highly valued in society.

I agree that solutions to precarity are complex, and UCU isn't doing much to encourage sophisticated thinking on these issues.

A system where temporary posts do not exist would likely have the effect of forcing out all those who didn't get a permanent position first time round after finishing their PhD (I hear this is actually the case in some European countries??). They'd have to go and seek for employment somewhere else. Some would maybe be able to continue doing their research on the side to become competitive for permanent posts, but obviously wouldn't be able to gain teaching and administrative experience. I don't think this kind of system would be particularly meritocratic either - it would be great for those lucky enough to get permanent jobs, but it would also privilege those with powerful supervisors who can endorse their students in a market in which academics walk into permanent jobs with little demonstrable experience. Or you could make all PhD positions fully funded and coming with clearly delimited teaching responsibilities, thus providing a "route" into permanent positions, but again this would mean that only a fraction of candidates would get to do PhDs (and many academics wouldn't be happy about this at all, as PhD supervision tends to be quite enjoyable and also good for promotion points and the like).

From discussions on social media and even campaign materials, etc. I get the sense that a lot of people think universities could just give a permanent contract on a £30,000+ salary to each and every precarious post-doc or recent PhD graduate. That's just not sustainable, and it doesn't help that the "debate" is so simplistic.

I agree with the point that ZHC should be fractional and I know some departments do abuse them.

Also totally agree with arid that if we had the sort of reform that some in UCU are asking for, then there would be fewer jobs overall and it would be much much harder to secure a post. I think a lot of the issues also stem from an over recruitment of phd students, so that would need to be nipped in the bud. I think UK academia is much more accessible than some countries on the continent but it does come at a price.

As for senior people griping about salary, nope, I am sorry, but what is so special about academics that merits us being paid in excess of school teachers, nurses, police officers etc? We get paid well for what we do (those of us in permanent jobs). Lecturers at pre 92s tend to start on about 40k.

The thing is that if someone on 60k is demanding her 3% plus RPI increase on her salary, where is the money for reducing ZHC going to come from? I think it’s a mistake to push for payrises of that level across the board when the rise should be concentrated on those who are the least advantaged.

Same with pension contributions. I am prepared to pay slightly more in contributions if it means reducing ZHCs. UCU are asking the employers to undertake to bear the entire burden of any increase in contributions no matter what the next valuation says. How can anyone think that’s reasonable?

By the way, employers for the post 92s did meet the entire increase in contributions for the TPS and it led to a spate of redundancies and seriously impacted the financial position of many of them. The point is that you can’t demand that employers spend millions on pay rises for people over far in excess of the average wage and even more millions on keeping contributions to the pension low and at the same time expect that there is enough money left over to ‘end precarity’. How exactly?

Yes I agree the PhD oversupply has to be tackled and / or PhD training significantly retooled so that newly minted Drs can find jobs outside of Ac easily and without feeling like failures. That means unmaking academic mythmaking as well about who we are and what we're for.

I honestly feel it might be better to have fewer, proper posts instead of the merry-go-round of ZHC. (And I say that as a fixed term person regularly on said merry-go-round). We need to roll back marketization to the sane structures in other parts of Europe.

I do think higher pay for longer training is merited. We train for so much longer, and are paid so little whilst doing so.

I don't see having a decent pension when you finally start paying into it in your 30s as a luxury. It's more like deferred benefit due to the feudal PhD training system. Again, in many part of Europe, a PhD is a properly paid job with a pension. I don't understand why that can't be our model too.

it is true that the training is long. However, for many, the 3 phd years are funded. My best friend is a legal aid solicitor. The training is 6 years in total, only 2 years of which are paid, and when she qualified, she earned 26k. She now earns about 34k with limited scope for that increasing. She works around the clock and far harder and under far worse conditions than any academic I have met. Her employer contributes 3% to a defined contributions pension that she can’t afford to pay into herself and only started doing so when it became mandatory. Before that, she had no pension at all, as was the norm in her sector. She performs a vital public service without which society wouldn’t function.

If 40 k for a new lecturer, 50k plus for an SL, 60k plus for a reader at pre 92s is too low and doesn’t reflect the hard work and training they put in, what would be a reasonable salary? Should the new lecturer start on 50? 60?

The simple point is that there isn’t the cash for increasing everyone’s salaries, freezing contributions AND improving conditions for those worst off. That’s why combining these fights and pretending that we all have the same goals is disingenuous and stupid. We all know who the most powerful are and they are likely to come off the best, meaning that those already badly off will have sacrificed themselves for pensions they will never have themselves.

We have several temporary posts in my department. It was seen as a way of trying to help newly-minted PhD students, give them some solid teaching & admin experience, ad bring them into a supportive departmental atmosphere. They are advertised openly, and are generally 0.5te for a calendar year, teaching only.

Not ideal, but actually they pay better than the same hours on an hourly-paid rate. These are precarious contracts, and we've had push back from a couple of postdocs who weren't re-employed. But we warn PhD students about the situation, if they have half a brain they can see it for themselves, and I like to point out that it has never been easy to get a permanent academic post I finished my PghD in the early 1990s, at a time when there was still a bit of give in the system, and of my PhD cohort (I trained in one of the largest departments in the country for my discipline - humanities) probably only 2 or 3 of us, out of the 20 who started together, actually got in to lectureships, and not straightaway - I did a couple of years on short-term junior Teaching Fellow contracts.

Turning hourly-paid budgets into annual contracts is a good step I think, but it means we have a lot less money for hourly-paid tutors - in fact, none.

We use PGRs for some hourly-paid work, and they are paid a package which includes the time spent face-to-face teaching in seminars, plus the time they sit in the lecture, and a few hours pay allowance for meetings of the teaching team, plus a rate for marking.

That pay rate for PGRs doesn't cover the actual hours spent, but as I explained to one of my PhD students, we see it as professional training, rather than an income as such.

What shocked me in previous strikes was the anger directed at "them" by my own junior colleagues - I pointed out that as an HoD, I was one of "them." And that if we wanted humane and rational management, we needed not to turn this into "us" and "them."

But I think it's got worse. I'm on strike today & I'll strike on the last day, but I cannot afford to strike nor do I think hat this strike is appropriate or effective.

That’s why combining these fights and pretending that we all have the same goals is disingenuous and stupid

Yup.More money for permanent staff means fewer "precarious" jobs - which have always been a recognised way into permanent jobs.

And securing precarious jobs means less money for salaries & pensions.

The "Four Fights" are contradictory.

Godwins I agree. I think a very simplistic analysis is being applied by UCU that presumes that universities have limited pots of money that can solve all problems. At the same time, some places are actually in quite bad financial positions.

I also think the argument that it all goes on new shiny buildings is simplistic. It’s an easy target but we do need some buildings and we’d also complain if we worked in dilapidated unsuitable buildings. That doesn’t mean I think that universities all invest their money incredibly sensibly but it’s not quite as simple as ‘stop building new buildings and pay for all precarious staff to become permanent’.

Not sure what the answer is but I doubt much will come from standing on a rain soaked picket while the union continues its confusing message.

As an aside, does anyone know why the strike negotiators are unpaid? Is it some sort of legal requirement under trade union law? Just that it seems like a fairly vital job. Also, the people they have selected to do it aren’t really, to be polite, the sort of people I would choose to negotiate on highly complex financial matters. Grady herself has demonstrated fundamental misunderstandings of various matters, as have the others. It doesn’t bode that well.

Agree Godwins, I have no animosity to older colleagues, who in my case have gone out of their way to make precarious appointments as lovely as possible. Agree that fractional contracts are the way to go, and I'd like to see the end of hourly paid contracts. I don't agree with underpaying PGRs for teaching - as only a fraction of them will actually become fully fledged academics so I'm not sure it is fair to call it professional training. The apprentice model that we have is a bit of a problem because so few PhDs will actually fill those roles, I'm in favour of changing things up a bit.

It’s an easy target but we do need some buildings

I work at a place where the teaching day is 8:30am to 6:30pm. Because there is only one (maybe 2) lecture theatres which can accommodate some big lecture groups.

I'm in a smaller department, but some of our teaching rooms are bursting at the seams, and my office is in an old building with really erratic heating, drafty windows & no double glazing. I often work with a knee rug & 2 jumpers!

Grady herself has demonstrated fundamental misunderstandings of various matters

Along with the luxury spa chat.

I'm a very well paid professor, but I'm currently having to count my pennies. Spa breaks? I'm lucky to get a day out at the seaside travelling by bus (partly over-work load).

@GodwinsRulebook I completely see your point that "us" and "them" divisions are simplistic and unhelpful. However, in the last few years I've seen with dismay at my place how quick HoDs and other middle management are to embrace uncritically whatever comes from above to the detriment of their colleagues (especially precarious ones), while at the same time hanging "Four fights" posters on their doors and otherwise flaunting their progressive credentials.
I understand opposing the REF, TEF, NSS, rankings and other metrics is probably a lost battle for individual HoDs. But what leaves me truly perplexed, for example, is seeing HoDs not even fighting on the smaller things that could make a difference. For example, some are keen to actively push more and more bureaucracy into staff that effectively makes our summers shorter (apparently, "loops" need to be closed in July, and preparations for the next academic year need to start in late August). Or they design and give the go-ahead to full programs that effectively consist of 1 full-time member of staff and an army of precarious post-docs.
I do understand that being HoD is no easy job. Even these small acts of resistance could be difficult to undertake for an individual, depending on their circumstances. But the fact that all of this is done so uncritically, without even a hint of self-reflection, is what annoys me to no end. I'm of course not implying that you're one of these HoDs - in fact, what you say about the 0.5 positions sounds sensible, in the circumstances. But I feel, as @Pota2 has said earlier, that many senior academics are fully invested in the system and I wonder how committed they are to changing it despite their pro-strike posturing.

But someone on 60k talking of needing to strike due to poor pay when their earnings are in the top 10 or even 5 per cent of salaries? That won’t inspire sympathy. Lecturers, SLS, readers and profs are NOT badly paid.

They aren't well paid, relative to the salaries and conditions available across the global HE market. This causes recruitment and retention issues & threatens the future of UK HE.

I agree that the issues are more severe at earlier career stages: a lecturer salary does not go far in many parts of England. But even a professorial salary compares poorly to salaries of other highly skilled workers in cities like Cambridge, particularly given the high house prices.

These issues don't have easy solutions but if we want to recruit and retain global leaders in academia we have to address these and all the other issues (sustainable pension schemes; excessive workload; insufficient resources for research; exploitative zero hours contracts etc). However I don't think a strike mixing all of these issues together is going to make much progress.

Yes. I'm a professor - had I gone into the civil service or similar sort of work instead of academia, & assuming a similar kind of successful career - I'd be earning probably around 50% more than I currently earn. And have a far more secure pension & more regular working hours ...

Pota, I agree with most of what you say but lecturers don’t all start on 40K. The issue is not the starting salary but the time it takes to get a permanent job. I was well over 30 when I got a permanent appointment (and although I have some non-academic work experience, it is limited).
There are so many good points on this thread. Academics are largely oblivious to how the general public see them. We could use a union that pierces some of these delusions.
PS: I did cross the picket line yesterday. And it was not pleasant. But I will do it again on Monday.

I don't know if this is the right place for me to post but I am a student suffering the effects of a second strike in my final year of uni.
The first strike we recieved fair notice for, everybody's grades suffered a small dip. This strike we received 24hours notice for.
By the time my tutor returns, we will have one week to attend a lecture and write an assignment, there's little hope she would of had time to mark all of the last assignments, so there will be no feedback to support development.
It adds so much stress on an already stressful year, but reading threads like this do help slightly.
Obviously, I don't want my tutor to suffer in the work place and I do agree with some strike action but as students it's having a detrimental effect on our grades.

I see where you are coming from Putapeony, and I believe that this strike in particular is very damaging to students. You make your point very respectfully, and I wish my fellow academics would be more responsive to student concerns instead of mindlessly waving UCU banners or sloganeering on academic twitter. Did your lecturer explain to you why she was striking?

I do sympathise Putapeony, I’ve left the union now, but when I did go on strike we were not allowed to assess students on things we hadn’t taught face to face, which seemed fair. If you know the subject of the up coming assessment could you do some reading now on it to give yourself a flying start? The strikes are not continuous, so ask the lecturer for reading recommendations, they can respond on non-strike days. Ask if there was generic feedback from previous years on the assessment you just completed that they could share. I would hope they they would want to help since these strikes are not meant to be against students.

Genuinely interested, @Daca, how do you think academics are perceived by the general public?

I also have sympathy, Putapeony. Sometimes strike action is the only option but the problem is that I don’t think the ucu explored other options. It has also called the strike at a time that will make it ineffective. I have left the ucu so am not striking. I do know that I would be angry if I was a student. I think the public would have more sympathy if the strike concerned zero hours lecturers and people on fixed term contracts.

I do take the point about time to appointment to a full time role, of course. That does make a difference. I guess the question is how much should they get paid. I guess I still believe most permanent staff are fairly decently paid. I am just cautious of talking about being underpaid when I’m on almost 50k when so many are on so much less than that. I remember Jo Grady doing that when she was still in academia and she was on over 50k living in Sheffield (where you can live extremely well on that). She said she was so skint she had to rent rather than buy and she had been permanent since the age of 26. I think that sort of talk makes it really hard to get the public onside.

We've been talking for a while about a lot of this stuff on the other thread.

I agree with you, OP, this strike more than the last has brought out some really nasty bullying behaviours. I see lots of tweets suggesting there is never any reason to cross a picket line which are uncomfortable to read example and example

I left UCU. I'm not striking but its certainly a very hostile environment for those of us not on strike.