Academic article arguing we should all join UCU because it's the best way to save HE.

[DanceAppleGCMum]

NC but long-time poster.

A friend sent me this article yesterday and we had a good chat about it: onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1468-4446.13200

Knowing there's some very mixed views on UCU on MN, I was wondering what academic MNers made of this article?

I'm in a very pro-UCU department so a sensible, critical conversation about UCU isn't possible unfortunately.

(Edited to actually add a link)

@Patterncarmen Not to derail, but why did UCU have a food bank for staff during covid? We were getting paid in full the whole time!

I’ve been thinking about the premise of this article and I have to say I think the author is looking through the wrong end of the telescope. HE needs a massive cash injection along with structural reform. How is that going to be achieved by UCU?

The article says:
"Creating a culture of union meetings within your local unit of work is essential to be building collective strength and worker consciousness. If you don't have a rep for your department, ask the branch to provide a list of members or to send an email on your behalf"

Is it legal for a UCU branch manager to provide a random academic with a list of UCU members in their department? Is this against GDPR?

No. Not if the UCU has been clear that this is what will be done.

Yes I’m in the union and am very grateful. Over my many years in academia it’s done a lot for me in terms of pay, reinstatement of pension and also negotiating a much better settlement for a wave of redundancies (pre current crisis, to do with a merger). For me it’s the counter factual that is of interest: if we did not have the unions, what would our pay and conditions look like right now?

A group of people - all women - are currently developing a new university structure. This will result in redundancies or people taking jobs they have no interest in doing simply to have a job. These individuals have no experience of education beyond managing professional services teams. They don't know what happens in classrooms, lectures or labs. They don't have any curriculum experience. They do no student facing work. Most don't have any postgraduate qualifications. None have teaching qualifications, research qualifications or experience in either. Yet these administrators are making decisions about curriculum and taking away people's agency.

Sorry - what is this referring to?

Where is this @SickOfUselessManagement? It seems very odd