Marking & Assessment Boycott

[aridapricot]

So how do you think this will pan out this time? Are you taking part? How do you think things will go in your university/department?
My uni is docking 30% pay. Also in my department (where the spirit tends to be "yes we'll do whatever UCU asks us to do but we'll also go out of our way to cause any inconvenience to students") people are already talking about mitigations... 🙄I am not a UCU member and won't be taking part but I also fear that at some point I will be asked to cover colleague's marking or (even worse) redistribute it (given that I'm HoD).

She is in the union. And has stood on picket lines with the rest of us.

I know what I think privately, but will keep my feelings to myself because I'm an adult, and a professional. I'll continue to have a collegial working relationship with her but unfortunately this is where it ends. I'm extremely careful anyway never to say anything to colleagues I wouldn't be keen for the whole department to hear, but in future I'll be watching my back (and my tongue) with her in particular. It's a pity, as we had a good working relationship before.

@EveryWitchWaybutLoose - I'm completely with you on the disgraceful treatment of Stock et al and your lack of faith in the GS. Unfortunately I work in one of the more strident, draconian institutions, and we are having our own very serious localized problems at present. I simply can't afford to leave myself unprotected by leaving the union, although I have given that option careful consideration. Our local branch are fantastic, too. I've a sinking sort of feeling that we are going to need them in the none-too distant future.

It's all so divisive and unpleasant. And my own loyalty - I'm very much a believer in unions - has been stretched to breaking point. I've participated in all strike action (including disaggregated) since the start of this dispute and have suffered significantly for that. I don't believe UCU can realistically expect any more of people. The fight in me seems to have spent itself of late - not least because of serious illness in the case of both myself and my partner. At some point I'm going to have to take the decision to put the needs of our family first:

Thanks for the supportive note! Much appreciated.

I wonder if you could join a different campus union, of the Free Speech Union?

So sorry for your situation @SerafinasGoose - you sound so principled and sensible. It must be horrible.

I've kind of opted out in what feels pretty much the coward's way.

When faced with a student complaint about alleged transphobia 6 years ago, my local case worker was brilliant. I've gambled that the student's union having once tried this & it being chucked out won't do it again. But that crap was 6 years ago, so who knows?

I find the current UCU Executive to be posturing like the undergraduate Spart/Trots

Ive been hanging in to my UCU membership in the faint hope of change in the leadership, but may give up soon and join another union. There was a crazy amount of amendments at the last AGM going far beyond a HE remit. As though everyone wants to be a politician but without running for politics. It’s no wonder the bread and butter of running a union for ALL its member’s benefits has been lost.

I used to be in UCU, though I was never very active. But I have spent time on picket lines and also lost a fair chunk of salary - only to have some of my ‘comrades’ turn on me when I politely disagreed with them on a political issue unrelated to pay and working conditions.

The low point came when a colleague who I thought I had friendly relations with blanked me on the picket line, presumably because I was an embarrassment to him.

So if you have a problem with the colleague who marked your work, SerafinasGoose, why don’t you just tell her. Might be uncomfortable for the time being but perhaps she has her reasons.

In a sense, I don't have a problem with her per se, I have a problem with one thing she did. She isn't stupid. She knows, and has been sounding me out on a professional basis, doubtless to test the water and see what kind of a reception she gets.

I'm paying her the courtesy of assuming that she does have her reasons. We all do. I had to face off horrendous bullying from a line manager who tried to push me into marking, or to declare MAB before a deadline had been missed, so I do appreciate how hard this is (at the same time dealing with serious personal circumstances myself). I find your colleagues' behaviour in turning against you for a political issue childish, but unsurprising in the current climate. The one who blanked you needs to grow up.

I have no intention of blanking this colleague, or mistreating her, but of simply being very careful not to say anything to her in future which might find its way to management ears. This is surely sensible. But aside from anything else she's vulnerable in terms of her mental health, and I will not be party to any form of bullying of her (and would strenuously resist it if other colleagues tried). At the same time, given the above I think discussing it would be a mistake. It's now water under the bridge and I'm applying the principle of least said, soonest mended.

I know union types can be quite strident and have beliefs they hold with conviction. I'm also mindful that I might have my own very difficult decisions to make if/when it comes to future MAB action. We shouldn't judge, and I try not to. Next time it might be me.

You might also end up in a management position at some point, as a senior admin role is generally required for promotion (but maybe you are already at this level). But I agree with you more generally, industrial action tests workplace relations to breaking point, which is why I think it should be a last resort.

A lot of academics lack maturity in their personal conduct … made worse by their conviction that they are oh so clever when it comes to ‘sounding people out’, or manipulating them in other ways. But it’s nice to be able to talk fairly openly on this forum …

Any news on the ballot, though?!

My understanding is that the MAB will be called off pretty much immediately (i.e., from Friday). This is unofficial channels though.

I think it’s official - some colleagues have received UCU emails about suspension of the boycott.

Yep it's been called off: https://twitter.com/ucu/status/1699432646747517034

To be replaced with another week of strikes! Surely management will just ride it out as they have done all the others, especially as the mandate then lapses.

If they think any of us can afford to strike after the summer we've just had, they're delusional.

I really don't know how many people will be observing this round of strikes.
Does anyone have any evidence, if only anecdotal, of how MAB has impacted on UCU membership? My sense (but I might be mistaken) is that there is a non-insignificant number of members who would have quietly withdrawn from MAB in the last few months (or perhaps never observed it), but remain members and would take action such as strikes, which are more time-limited.
My sense is that those of us who are in principle sympathetic to unionization but not to the point that being in a union constitutes a value in itself had left UCU well before MAB started, either because of its anti-gender-critical stance, because of its past management of the dispute (as in my case) or because of something else? So perhaps MAB hasn't had much of an impact in terms of membership loss.

My senior admin roles relate more to REF coordination, managing the research centre/culture, coordinating training and mentoring colleagues through their research trajectories.

This is the role I'd always aspired to. I have no desire to people-manage (although at some point I know it's probably coming), largely because of the observations you make in your second paragraph! Academia can be a strangely myopic world.

It is. I received the email from Grady at 3.30 today.

Well that's something at least.

Well, thank GOD for that.

@aridapricot I can only speak for myself, but I've left UCU as a direct result of the MAB.

About 12 members of staff, myself included, joined UCU in order to participate in MAB so as not to let our colleagues down (in my particular situation this was my reason and those of my friends at work - not claiming that others on this thread and beyond have let their colleagues down, as I don't think that!). So I suspect that there has been movement in and out.

However, I do know several now leaving after the failure of the MAB.

There's usually only a few in my school who participate in strikes, falling each time. However, I'm not aware of a single person in our (large) school who participated in the MAB. Certainly all marking was completed on schedule in our department of approx 25 academics. It wasn't discussed much but I think the prevailing view was that this wasn't the cohort of students to take such action with.

Strike in week 1 anyone?

I’m sure there will be some at my place. Luckily I don’t have to go in that week.

Slightly off topic but Grady has been busy talking about ‘educating’ UCU members on freedom of speech:

She said: “Whilst it’s clear that gender-critical beliefs are protected, the form of expression isn’t. You might have freedom of speech, but you don’t have freedom to offend - particularly if that offence is enshrined within law, and I think that’s one of the things that we try and educate our members about quite a lot.”

What is she actually talking about?? Is she paying any attention to the fall-out from the boycott?

Source (Telegraph article): https://archive.ph/SN0cN

There is no legal ban on offending. The precise law is on 'belief worthy of respect in a democratic society." Here's the text from the Equakities Act:

The criteria for determining what is a “philosophical belief” are that it must be genuinely held; be a belief and not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available; be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour; attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance; and be worthy of respect in a democratic society, compatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others. So, for example, any cult involved in illegal activities would not satisfy these criteria. The section provides that people who are of the same religion or belief share the protected characteristic of religion or belief. Depending on the context, this could mean people who, for example, share the characteristic of being Protestant or people who share the characteristic of being Christian.

It's patently clear that Grady hasn't been educating herself before turning to UCU members, some of whom might have the temerity to think the wrong sort of thoughts.

From the EAT's summary of Forstater: "The Claimant’s belief, whilst offensive to some, and notwithstanding its potential to result in the harassment of trans persons in some circumstances, fell within the protection under Article 9(1), ECHR and therefore within s.10, EqA.".

This is beyond embarrassing.

I'm not sure who Grady's been taking lessons from, but it isn't somebody who knows anything about the basics of the law concerning freedom of expression.

"Free speech includes not only the inoffensive but the irritating, the contentious, the eccentric, the heretical, the unwelcome and the provocative provided it does not tend to provoke violence. Freedom only to speak inoffensively is not worth having." (Redmond-Bate v DPP [1999], per Sedley LJ)