Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To not support strike action

297 replies

Happyhappyveggie · 25/01/2018 15:03

I’m in a university trade union and we have been called to take strike action over our pension.

The action is 14 days over 4 weeks, starting at 2 days a week and then escalating over that month to a full week.

I simply can’t do it. It will put my children and family security in trouble but now I am thinking should i leave the Union rather than strike break.

I am finding it all very stressful and upsetting actually as I support the need to protect pensions but it feels like my immediate circumstances are more important- as in keeping a roof over my kids heads.

Aibu? Can you be in a trade union and not support action? I find morally I am struggling with it.

OP posts:
whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 08:30

We are in the same boat, OP. We are coming to the end of a long and expensive build and money is really tight, and now the union have called a strike that may reduce both of our wage packets by half next month.

To be clear, we are both supporters of industrial action. We both think the changes to the pension fund are awful. We think that strikes are an acceptable and effective way of making this point. But we also both feel a responsibility to students and we don't want to do anything to hurt them. I think there ought to be a middle ground here between the ridiculous and ineffectual 2 hour strikes that were called a while ago, and going on strike for half a month - the action is too heavy, and too prolonged and I suspect many people will simply 'work from home' without officially withdrawing their labour (and having their pay docked)

Furthermore, DH is a Head of Department, so we have it on two fronts: he is a union member, but also expected to manage staff and report on teaching that hasn't been done through this period. He's asked for guidance from the union during this and the last strike about what his position should be and what he should do; they haven't even been arsed to respond.

We are both deeply unimpressed with UCU and Sally Hunt, as I think are most colleagues. To reemphasize: we think strikes are the right action, but not in a way that really damages students, not on this scale.

picturesAndText · 26/01/2018 08:33

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 08:33

Sorry, it's actually a reduction of more than half, isn't it? About 3/4, in fact.

SoupyNorman · 26/01/2018 08:35

whiskyowl how can we disrupt our employers without disrupting students? Genuinely interested if you have alternate suggestions.

Boysboysboys · 26/01/2018 08:36

I'm in the same union and also can't afford to take all those strike days. Our branch has acknowledged this and is focussing on one or two. I think it is too much of an ask to lose the best part of a month's pay which I can't afford and would result in significant hardship for my family. I'm only going to strike on two of the days, from previous experience no one will get an eyelid!

Namechanged36 · 26/01/2018 08:36

But the op is not in a unique situation.

Most people are going to struggle to a greater or lesser extent from losing 14 days pay.

No I don't know her individual circumstances. I know my own, which frankly are precarious to say the least.
And I know those of many of the people at my institution who will be on the picket line and will have real financial hardship over the next few months.
My view is that it is worth it to stop the savage attack on pensions and our other terms and conditions.

I think the op is correct to resign. A trade union is not a club that you pay subs to and sit back and enjoy the benefits. It's all about collective action and fighting for future generations.

Namechanged36 · 26/01/2018 08:39

whiskyowl what is the point of a strike if no inconvenience is caused?

Would it make any difference to you if your students/ NUS supported the strike?

Tollygunge · 26/01/2018 08:42

Haven't read the thread but I agree crossing a picket line is pretty low- leave your union if you don't support strike action. The miners weren't exactly flush when they were striking were they?

Tollygunge · 26/01/2018 08:43

I don't mean to be rude but nobody forces you to be in a union- don't want to take part in collective action then leave

WitchesHatRim · 26/01/2018 08:46

@Namechanged36 dodged the question about whether you think its ok to call posters scabs or ' as low as you can get' I see.

whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 08:49

To be clear, DH and I will be striking, though we don't quite know how this will work in DH's case since there is apparently no advice at all from the union to HoDs. Angry I guess he'll have to make it up as he goes along Confused.

However, we feel that UCU has for some time been poorly run, and that the rhetoric and tactics they use are misguided. I personally think you could significantly reduce harm to students' education by calling the strikes over a longer period of time. I also think that withholding marking is a tremendously effective method that should be been considered.

picturesAndText · 26/01/2018 08:51

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ShatnersWig · 26/01/2018 08:53

I don't think anyone posted the results of the ballot (apologies if they did) that the OP took part in.

There was a 58% turnout. Of which 88% voted for strike action. That means, in effect, 51% of union members voted for a strike, so pretty darn close. 93% of the 58% voted for action short of a strike.

The committee, who proposed the strike, are pressing ahead with it. Could be argued that as more people voted for action short of a strike, then that's what they should be doing. You know, that whole collective thing people were talking about earlier.

SoupyNorman · 26/01/2018 09:02

Shatners members who didn't wish to strike should have voted against the strike.

The laws on balloting for industrial action are heavily weighted against unions - electronic ballots not allowed, ballot boxes not allowed at workplaces - and this was a record turnout.

Original poster
Happyhappyveggie · 26/01/2018 09:04

As I have said, I voted for action short of a strike.

The other point I would like to make is that in our institution, strike action hits student services (like me) harder because we work 9-5 contracts whereas academics often come and go without defined hours and can therefore not be in work but still get paid as they just work at home. Many are open about this fact.

OP posts:
whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 09:07

Shatners - the other thing to bear in mind is something contextual. UCU recently called a series of "strikes" that were literally 2 hours long. A very soft, gentle approach - many argued too soft and too gentle. They seem to have overcompensated in response to that criticism by calling a series of crazily long walkouts.

There are two issues in relation to this. Firstly, the union management has shown poor common sense as well as poor tactical sense. There is a middle ground here. Secondly, I am not sure union members were really aware of what kind of strike they were voting for. There is a huge difference between voting for a 2-hour walk out and three-quarters of a month. I certainly wasn't aware myself. Now maybe I missed a lot of small print here (I haven't been as attentive to every word of communications as I should have been), but nowhere was it clear to me when I voted that action on this scale was being considered.

The UCU pension scheme in question is also in deep, deep financial shit. It's one of the most maladministered, terribly run schemes in the country. And it's huge. Something does need to be done about the enormous black hole in its finances. While I oppose the proposed changes as a really terrible set of proposals, I do think some adjustment is probably going to be practically necessary. We do need to fight for the best possible settlement, but I think it's unrealistic to think the scheme can continue. Frankly, I think there must be a huge scandal in the way the whole thing has been run.

whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 09:08

Sorry, that should say "to think the scheme can continue in its current form".

SoupyNorman · 26/01/2018 09:09

But the union heavily disputes the poor financial picture painted of the USS pension whisky and has presented alternate modelling which show a very different scenario.

ShatnersWig · 26/01/2018 09:09

Soupy Yes, a bit like Brexit. But, upthread, the staunchest supporters of unions and strikes said that the point of a union was standing together collectively.

Technically, 51% of members voted for strike action but 54% voted for action short of a strike. If members are expected to stand collective for the majority decision, why aren't the ruling committee also standing collective with the majority decision and pursuing action short of a strike?

Presumably, because the ruling committee proposed and wanted strike action, so they pursue THEIR preference, rather than the actual result?

Admittedly, I am being technically pedantic, but it's just as valid. Do people stand collectively or not?

whiskyowl · 26/01/2018 09:10

"whereas academics often come and go without defined hours and can therefore not be in work but still get paid as they just work at home"

This may be true of junior staff; it certainly isn't true of senior staff who are often in back-to-back meetings from 7am to 6pm.

SoupyNorman · 26/01/2018 09:11

It wasn't an either or choice. So you can't say more people wanted x rather than y, because most people voted for both.

ShatnersWig · 26/01/2018 09:16

Soupy Then what was the point in putting that option on the ballot?

It should have been, quite simply: do you support strike action, yes or no?

SoupyNorman · 26/01/2018 09:19

And presumably 88% of those balloted would have voted yes.

12% would have voted no, which includes some people who would have voted for ASOS.

It's pretty clear!

ilovesooty · 26/01/2018 09:24

Why don't people who don't appreciate the collective nature of unions make alternative provision if they only want an insurance policy?

ShatnersWig · 26/01/2018 09:24

Soupy Figures can be tweaked in all sorts of ways, as I've shown, if you leave room for any form of ambiguity. It should have been an outright yes or no vote, to give a clear and unambiguous but very close nothing but a 51% in favour of strike action.