Sheffield UCU member Tim Herrick (Senior University Teacher, School of Education) recently attended a seminar organised by Leeds Occupational Health Advisory Service, entitled “Long Covid and Employment: overcoming challenges“. His report is below.

In the seminar we heard from a range of speakers, focusing on people living with Long Covid and medical professionals involved in supporting them. The emphasis throughout was on understanding what was happening for individuals with this condition; symptoms vary so much within the patient group and across time, that the safest recommendation is to focus on what is happening for this individual at this moment.

The figures around Long Covid are startling; there’s an estimated 2 million people living with Long Covid in the UK, and 36 million across Europe; and in the UK, more working days are lost due to Long Covid than to any other condition. Research by the Institute for Fiscal Studies suggests that Long Covid may have resulted in the loss of 4.4 million working hours per week in the UK.

The strength of hearing directly from people with the condition was understanding the impact of these figures in the context of individual lives; for instance, one speaker was a GP who had previously run 5 sessions per week. In an attempted return to work after Long Covid, she ran one session; and was so exhausted, she spent the next three weeks in bed.

There isn’t a clear set of symptoms associated with Long Covid, although fatigue, breathlessness, and tachycardia (accelerated heartbeat) are found more often than most. And while there isn’t a clear treatment programme for the condition overall, real progress can be made with these individual symptoms, for instance, through medication that helps regulate heartbeat.

If colleagues, union reps, or caseworkers are supporting someone with Long Covid, especially if they are having difficulties staying in or returning to work, there are some basic principles of good practice it might be useful to remember:

• Each individual’s experience is different, including their set of symptoms and concomitant support needs. Attend, therefore, to their experiences, and recognise that the forms that effective support might take are likely to vary over time.
• Too rigid an approach to institutional processes may also not be helpful – the duration of phased returns might need to be flexed, the reasonable adjustments required might need to be wide-ranging and adaptable, and regular communication between the member and their managers is likely to be key.
• There’s the old medical dictum of seeing the patient not the illness; each person with Long Covid will be experiencing it in slightly different ways, and there will be a whole set of possible intersections with previous conditions or lifestyle factors. There is also likely to be psychological impact; as one of the experts by experience put it in the seminar, “The fatigue I face isn’t just being tired, it’s life changing“.

Friday March 15th is International Long Covid Awareness day, and I’d welcome suggestions from colleagues in the branch as to whether we might do anything to mark this event.

For colleagues who are struggling with a return to work, or who are supporting those who might be facing challenges, it’s worth remembering the Trades Union Congress resources about Long Covid, and, for more of a deep dive, the Society for Occupational Medicine’s report about returning to work with Long Covid.

My thanks again to the branch for enabling my attendance at this event.

Long Covid and Employment: overcoming challenges-  Slides and handouts

The following motion was passed by Sheffield UCU at the general meeting held on 16/11/2023.

Motion to End the Violence in Palestine, Support Palestinian Rights, Protect Academic Freedom and Freedom of Expression and Oppose all Racism

Sheffield UCU notes:

1. The recent upsurge in appalling violence in Israel-Palestine has claimed around 1400 Israeli lives and over 10,000 Palestinian lives (at the time of writing); and is causing the on-going displacement of more than half a million people in the Gaza Strip;
2. The Nakba, the violent dispossession of Palestinian people from their land by Israel, has been ongoing since 1948. Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank have been living under Israeli military occupation since 1967, whilst Palestinians in the Gaza Strip have been living under an Israeli-Egyptian blockade since 2007;
3. Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, B’Tselem, Al-Haq and the past four out of five UN Special Rapporteurs on the state of human rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory have stated that Palestinians are living under a regime of apartheid;
4. The UK government is complicit in the dispossession of Palestinians and has actively endorsed and materially supported this ongoing regime of apartheid and the current war crimes and crimes against humanity being carried out by Israel against the Palestinian population in the Occupied Territory;
5. The colonial, racist and genocidal narratives articulated by Israeli state officials to systematically dehumanise Palestinians, including categorising Palestinians as barbarians, animals and terrorists; and the uncritical adoption of such narratives, discourses and categories in UK public life.
6. The UK’s complicity has also entailed increasingly aggressive attempts to censor people demanding an end to Palestinian oppression, including those at UK universities whose experiences have recently been highlighted by the British Society for Middle East Studies (BRISMES) and UCU national.
7. Increases in racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia, in the UK and beyond.

Sheffield UCU believes that:

1. The targeting of civilians by any party should be condemned as a war crime;
2. Israel’s cutting off of the entry of supplies to Gaza, which has left civilians without food, water, electricity, and medical aid; its targeting of civilians, hospitals, schools, border crossings and other civilian infrastructure; and its attempts to forcibly transfer the population from the north of Gaza, may amount to genocide;
3. Israeli occupation and apartheid must end and the internationally-recognised rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination must be realised;
4. It is unacceptable to equate all Jewish people with the Israeli state, and it is unacceptable to equate all Palestinians and Arabs with Hamas. Members should be able to express support for Palestinians and Palestine as well as Israelis and Israel, and everyone must be free to criticise governments around the world. In this case in particular, it is important that people are able to criticise the Israeli government without accusations of antisemitism;
5. Trade unions can play a role – and are being urged by Palestinian trade unions – to pressure the UK government to end its complicity in the on-going occupation of Palestine, the expansion of settlement construction and the war crimes committed against the Palestinian people;
6. UK universities, including the University of Sheffield, must not be complicit with war crimes and crimes against humanity and, as upheld in a SUCU branch motion on 8 June 2021, must immediately end all ties with entities involved in the perpetration of grave violations of human rights, including developing weaponry, military doctrines and legal justifications for the mass targeting of Palestinians.

Sheffield UCU resolves to:

1. Demand that the UK government call for an immediate ceasefire, most urgently an end to the military offensive by the Israeli state on Gaza, and call for the UK government to stop selling weapons to Israel
2. Donate £1000 to the humanitarian organisation Medical Aid for Palestinians;
3. Affiliate with the Sheffield Coalition against Israeli Apartheid
4. Actively support efforts to build local and national solidarity with Palestine, including, but not limited to, teach-outs, walk-outs, petitions, protests, support in promoting such events, allowing the use of the Sheffield UCU banner, and the sending of solidarity messages and delegates from the Branch;
5. Reiterate branch support for the campaign of boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel, including the Palestinian Academic Campaign for the Cultural and Academic Boycott of Israel; and develop a plan of concrete actions, including pledging to support and defend the right of members to refuse any work connected to the Israeli state or military;
6. Urgently create a working group to take forward the motion “Ending University Partnerships with Arms Manufacturers”, passed at the Sheffield UCU Annual General Meeting, 25 February 2023, in response to the Palestinian trade unions’ call to end military support for and trade with Israel;
7. Call on the VC to publicly affirm Sheffield University’s commitment to protecting academic freedom and freedom of speech with regards to expressions of solidarity with Palestinians, to offer identical support and freedom of speech guarantees to Palestinian students, staff and advocates as was offered to the people and supporters of Ukraine when they were made victims of imperial aggression, and to urge other Universities UK to do the same;
8. Call on the VC to respond to the Secretary of State for Education’s letter (dated 11 October 2023), pushing back on the dangerous implications of the letter in expanding the hostile environment on university campuses, stifling the protected right to free speech, and undermining universities’ duty of care to all students and staff;
9. Provide support to staff  and students censored, harassed, and/or disciplined  for expressing support for Palestinian rights;
10. Affirm national UCU’s call for members to withdraw from all voluntary positions with UKRI until such time as UKRI reverses its suspension of its EDI panel;
11. Oppose all forms of racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia;
12. Send this motion to members of the NEC and to the General Secretary.

The below is a summary of the correspondence related to negotiations and the resolution of the dispute between Sheffield UCU and representatives of management including the Director of HR, Ian Wright, the Vice-Chancellor, Koen Lamberts, and members of UEB between 14/09/23 to 25/09/23.

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Monday, 25 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Resolving the dispute

To: Ian Wright, VC Office, Koen Lamberts, Mary Vincent

 

Dear all,

Please find attached Document to aid negotiations, 25 September 2023 at our upcoming meeting.

Best,

Robyn

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Monday, 25 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Resolving the dispute

To: Ian Wright, VC Office

 

Dear Ian,

Although we would not normally cross our own picket line, given our commitment to finding a resolution to this dispute, and the short time frame, we are willing to meet in Firth court on this occasion, under the expectation that this will be a productive meeting with the aim of seeking a resolution.

Regards,

Robyn

 

From: Ian Wright

Date: Monday, 25 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Resolving the dispute

To: Sheffield UCU

 

Dear Robyn

Given other diary commitments we do not have the time to travel off campus for this meeting therefore it will be held in the UEB Boardroom in Firth Court. I appreciate that you would prefer not to cross your own picket, however you are not entering the building to work or to break the strike, but to enter into a dialogue with the University regarding the action you are asking your members to take. I trust you will therefore be willing to meet as outlined.

Should this prove too much of an obstacle for UCU colleagues we can meet online.

Please advise your position.

Regards,

Ian

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Friday, 22 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Resolving the dispute

To: Ian Wright, VC Office

 

Dear Ian,

We are able to meet with you on Monday at noon; please do let us know when you locate a suitable room. We trust that the location will not require us to cross our own picket lines.

As you know, we do not accept your characterisation of the 301 picket — or any of our pickets — as being intimidating, and we hold to the principle that workers have the right to picket their workplace. However, as a gesture of goodwill given the meeting Monday, we are willing to suspend the 301 picket on Monday, and can discuss further when we meet.

We look forward to a productive meeting on Monday.

Best,

Robyn

 

From: Ian Wright

Date: Friday, 22 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Resolving the dispute

To: Sheffield UCU

 
Dear Robyn

As you are aware, the Vice Chancellor and I were both away from Sheffield yesterday, hence my delayed response to your message of late Wednesday.

Your assessment that key student facing services are severely affected by the strike action does not align with the evidence we have seen nor with feedback from students regarding their welcome week experience. We continue to be able to provide services to students and meet demand.

One area where the impact on students has potentially been higher is at 301 where your largest picket line this week has included people who do not normally work at that location, had its ranks increased further temporarily by the “running picket” and been playing loud music. You will be aware we have been in contact with you twice this week to request that you do not picket this building due to the support services provided particularly to students with ASD and anxiety for whom the mere presence of a picket may badly affect them and potentially mean they do not attempt to approach or enter the building and so not get the support they need. It is very disappointing that UCU colleagues have refused to recognise this potential impact on those vulnerable students and have continued to picket in the way described.

You are right that a number of local branches have now called off the strike action planned at some universities in recent days. These have, in some instances, followed discussions with local management teams, and in other instances been as a result of the local branch consulting with its membership and determining to call off the strike action locally without any discussion with their local management teams. We are also seeing a number of branches continuing the strike action whether or not they have been in discussions with their local management teams. What we are seeing is a fragmentation of the dispute just ahead of the mandate expiring on 30 September, and each branch is acting on its own with a range of outcomes.

To date, the Sheffield UCU branch has declined to consult with its full membership either over the instigation of and subsequently, the continuation of the current strike action at Sheffield. As explained previously our position remains that we are not able to agree to the repayment of pay deductions for those 179 staff who participated in the marking and assessment boycott. However we can meet with you on Monday 25 September at 12:00noon. I expect to attend with the Vice-Chancellor, Vice-President for Education and one or two other HR colleagues. If you can let me know who will attend from UCU I will make arrangements for the location.

Regards,

Ian

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Wed, 20 Sept 2023

Subject: Resolving the dispute

To: Ian Wright

 

Dear Ian, Koen (cc UEB),

We are still awaiting a response to my emails of Friday and yesterday inviting you to meet with us. This is disappointing given Monday’s assurance given to all staff that you remain open to seeking a resolution to this local dispute, in which you also indicated you would be willing to hear any alternative means of reaching a local resolution to the strike action which do not breach the University’s principle on partial performance.

Over the last several days, the landscape of Higher Education has been rapidly changing, with numerous HEI management teams engaging with their local UCU branches and reaching a successful resolution. The University of Sheffield currently risks being one of a rapidly decreasing number of universities facing strike action during the first week of term.

There are a wide range of resolutions which have been reached by other institutions. Examples we are aware of include various combinations of the following:

• financial settlements that benefit all staff, including those not taking part in the MAB;
• financial settlements that benefit groups of staff particularly impacted by the MAB, such as those on casualised contracts;
• reduction in numbers of days deducted or the percentage of deductions in return for marking being completed by a given date, alongside commitments to adhering to fair workloading principles;
• commitments to review local employment processes and procedures;
• commitments to concrete improvement to local employment processes and procedures (e.g. no length of service requirement for access to parental leave)
• agreements on initiatives that rebuild team and department relationships;
• joint statements on moving forward in the national dispute.

For the avoidance of doubt, and as we have continuously emphasised, we are willing to engage in a creative exchange of potential ideas for a resolution. An agreement incorporating some combination of the above could prove acceptable to our members.

You are no doubt aware that key student-facing services offering financial, immigration, academic, welfare and wellbeing support are severely affected by this action. The Students’ Union has called for both sides to engage in negotiations, and we find it incredibly disappointing that we appear to be the only side committed to this.

We would like to highlight the positive impact on rebuilding local industrial relations that will benefit universities where agreement can be reached. Repairing divisions in our university community should be uppermost in all our minds.

We hope that you will be willing to move diaries as necessary to prioritise a meeting. We are aware that Koen has recently postponed several upcoming visits to departments which may offer some additional availability.

Regards,

Robyn Orfitelli

Branch President, Sheffield UCU Committee

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Tue, 19 Sept 2023

Subject: Update from Branch Meeting

To: Ian Wright, VC Office

 

Dear Ian and Koen,

This afternoon we held a well-attended Extraordinary General Meeting at which members discussed the dispute and solidified a branch position. The branch voted overwhelmingly to support the position below:

“This branch endorses the following position statement from the dispute committee:

Dispute committee recommends that the branch stands firm on the ten days of local action (which were called prior to the 5 days of national action, and are unaffected by last week’s HEC decisions), encourages members to show as much strength as possible on the picket lines, and calls an EGM on Friday to respond to any developments, including any offers from management, ahead of the weekend.”

We note that in your all-staff update on the industrial action that you remain open to seeking a resolution to this dispute. We would like to ask again for you to meet with us to discuss potential resolutions. If it would help for us to do so, we’d be happy to make clear to our members that the primary purpose of the meeting would be for both sides to share ideas.

We would be grateful for your earliest response.

Regards,

Robyn

 

From: Sheffield UCU

Date: Fri, 15 Sept 2023

Subject: Re: Letter on upcoming strike action

To: Ian Wright

Cc: VC Office

Dear Ian,

When we read your initial letter, we interpreted it — in good faith — to indicate a willingness to meet. We had informed members of this via email and twitter as we viewed it as a positive development. I notice the rephrasing in your subsequent email has clarified what you intended, but that wasn’t clear from your original wording.

We continue to be happy to meet with you to discuss alternate resolutions, and we ask you to consider holding this meeting as soon as possible. We will come prepared with ideas, and ask that you do the same. If you are unwilling to meet, we are happy to clarify to our membership that you are not prepared to meet unless we propose a non-monetary resolution in advance, which you would then consider in advance of granting a meeting. However, I am not sure that this would be the most productive way forward. We suggest a more productive approach would be for us to meet with you and/or other members of UEB on Monday to endeavour to reach a resolution, as every day of delay risks immense disruption to this university.

To reiterate, we remain prepared to meet as soon as Monday, and look forward to your response.

Best,

Robyn

 

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023, Ian Wright wrote:

Dear Robyn

Unfortunately Mary Vincent is on leave today and the Vice-Chancellor is unavailable this afternoon, hence I invited you in my letter to let me know if there is any possibility that something non-monetary in nature, which does not breach the University’s principle on partial performance, could persuade you and your members to call off the strike action at Sheffield, we would be happy to consider this and then, if appropriate, to meet with you to discuss it.

It’s disappointing that you appear to be presenting a different position to your members via Twitter/X, or at least presenting a partial picture of what I said in our response.

Whilst you may disagree with the numbers I have presented in terms of participation in the MAB, it remains the fact that your planned strike action is being called in response to the pay deductions implemented at Sheffield and those figures represent precisely the number of people and level of deductions that have been applied so it is in relation to those people and those deduction that you are asking all of your members to take two weeks of strike action. I note that whilst you have published the letter you have sent to the University, you have refrained from publishing my response.

As previously stated, should there be something non-monetary in nature, which does not breach the University’s principle on partial performance, could persuade you and your members to call off the strike action at Sheffield, we would be happy to consider this and then, if appropriate, to meet with you to discuss it.

 

Regards

Ian Wright

Director of Human Resources

 

On Fri, 15 Sept 2023, Sheffield UCU wrote:

Dear Ian,

Thank you for writing back. As you know, we do not consider your figures to have accurately captured participation in the MAB.

That said, we are committed to exploring all possible resolutions to this strike action, so would be willing to meet with you to discuss options. Given the imminence of the action, we are prepared to meet as early as this afternoon should you be free to do so.

Best,

Robyn

 

Fri, 15 Sept 2023, Ian Wright wrote:

Dear Robyn

Thank you for your letter to the Vice-Chancellor dated 14 September 2023. He has asked that I reply on behalf of the University.

I would remind you that our position on partial performance is long standing and consistent. As with every previous period of industrial action taken at the University, we have written to all staff before action is taken to outline the implications of anyone participating in the industrial action, be it strike action or action short of strike. In respect of participation in the marking and assessment boycott we were clear that participation in the action would result in 100% pay deductions being applied, initially for a distinct three week period and then again for a second subsequent period. Your members therefore knew the consequences of their participation before they took the decision to participate.

Given this, the fact that the local UCU branch has determined, based on a vote of attendees at a recent branch meeting, to challenge the University’s position on pay deductions at this stage, after clear and transparent communications about the consequences and after your members have chosen to participate in the boycott, is a regrettable escalation.

 

I do not accept that our position in respect of pay deductions was disproportionate, noting that, unlike some other universities, we did not apply deductions on an ongoing basis from when the boycott started in April until it ended last week. The stance we have taken on pay deductions for those refusing to undertake marking and assessment reflects our position on partial performance and in particular the impact of the boycott on our students – something that continues to be felt by those who still do not have their full marks returned.

Now that the marking and assessment boycott has been called off, your threatened strike action over the University’s legitimate response to UCU’s national industrial action risks causing yet more disruption to the students here at Sheffield.

As I explained in the meeting we held last Friday, the University’s position on partial performance remains unchanged and as such we are not prepared to concede to your demands to repay deductions legitimately applied in response to your members taking lawful industrial action.

We do not, however, wish to see further unnecessary disruption to our students or staff, or indeed unnecessary financial hardship for your members associated with taking this strike action. I therefore want to draw your attention to our latest data on participation and the actual financial impact on participants in the boycott.

The boycott ran for 100 days over 20 weeks from 20 April until 6 September. There were 59 participants in the boycott who will face pay deductions in respect of the second period of action. Overall there were 179 staff who saw their pay reduced in some way as a result of their participation in the boycott. Six colleagues took part in the entirety of the boycott and therefore have had 30 days’ pay deducted. Of those who took part in the boycott, 139 will see fewer than 15 days’ of pay deductions and nearly half of those experienced pay deductions equivalent to 10 days or less.

I do not share this to in any way diminish the financial impact on MAB participants or the principles on which they decided to take action, but rather to provide context, as I imagine your members may have decided to strike on the understanding that a large number of fellow members have suffered 30 days’ of pay deductions due to the MAB.

A significant number of the MAB participants will lose more money through your strike action than they have had deducted as a result of their participation in the MAB, and anyone who has already seen pay deductions due to the MAB will simply experience more if they take strike action. Furthermore, you will be asking other members who haven’t been able to participate in the MAB due to the nature of their roles (including many lower paid Professional Services staff) to lose a significant portion of their salary. I realise this may be a point of principle for you and your members but I would urge you to be pragmatic as there will be no winners from the next weeks’ action and there is still time for you to step back.

With the national dispute still live, and a further national ballot looming, we simply cannot undermine our position on partial performance, or set any form of precedent ahead of potential future action. If, however, there is any possibility that something non-monetary in nature, which does not breach the University’s principle on partial performance, could persuade you and your members to call off the strike action at Sheffield, we would be happy to consider this and, if appropriate, to meet with you to discuss it.

 

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

 

Ian Wright

Director of Human Resources

 

 

On Thu, 14 Sept 2023, Sheffield UCU wrote:

Dear Koen (cc Ian),

Please find attached a letter from Sheffield UCU on the upcoming local strike action.

Regards,

Robyn

Dear Koen,
We are now just a couple of working days away from the start of local strike action at the University, which threatens significant disruption to new students’ induction and first impressions of the institution, and which will set the stage for yet another disrupted semester for everyone. In previous rounds of sector wide action, this university has publicly taken the position that there is nothing that can be done locally to resolve the issues underpinning the action; however, that is not true in this case, and the university has even made it clear in all staff communications that resolving this action is possible, and outlined one step which could be taken to do so.

At our meeting with Ian, Mary and Rob last week, having presented the position we had brought from our branch, they revealed that there was nothing that they were willing to offer to try to avert the strikes. This is hard to comprehend given the scale of what’s at stake. We left the meeting making it clear that we would be happy to meet at any point should you decide that there are matters on which you can engage.

With the strikes set to go ahead next week, we expect to be arranging regular meetings of our membership to discuss developments, which would allow us to put an offer from you to our members, should you be prepared to make one. In that spirit, should you be willing to meet to explore the ground that might lead to a resolution, we reiterate once again that we would be very happy to do so.

Kind regards,
Robyn Orfitelli, Branch President,
on behalf of the Sheffield UCU committee
Cc Ian Wright, Director of HR

Dear Koen,

I am writing on behalf of the Sheffield UCU Committee, and all University of Sheffield staff within our bargaining group, regarding the UK-wide dispute on pay and conditions which is the source of the current boycott of marking and assessment work by many staff at the University of Sheffield. Below I raise two areas of concern, and we would welcome the chance to meet with you at your earliest convenience to discuss them further.

We have been extremely disappointed in the approach that the Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) have adopted in this dispute, including their misuse of HESA data on sector finances. In a press release on 3 May, UCEA cites a sectoral deficit, despite the report it is based on warning that it “is not reflective of the pure underlying financial performance of these institutions for this year”. Instead, as you will be aware, this artefact is caused by a pension adjustment including the demonstrably unrepresentative 2020 USS valuation; absent this paper cost, the sector has yet again posted a sizeable surplus. I’m sure we both agree that these are increasingly difficult times in Higher Education, and it’s crucial for the future of the sector that we find a way to resolve the source of the conflict, for the benefit of all. However, such a misrepresentation of data serves neither staff nor employers, and it stands as an active impediment to ending the ongoing dispute.

Secondly, reaching a healthy resolution is not possible without the resumption of negotiations, which UCEA have continued to refuse, even as recently as Friday, 19 May. There is still time to bring this dispute to a close and avoid major disruptions to students’ graduation and progression, but every day that UCEA makes the active choice to delay makes it less likely that this will be possible.

While this dispute cannot be resolved by negotiation in Sheffield alone, that does not mean that we have no impact on the wider dispute. As a member of UCEA, we ask you to exercise your position as a member to ask them to both cease their public misrepresentation of sector finances and to return to the negotiation table. Just recently, the Universities of Glasgow and Cambridge have made joint public statements calling for the resumption of negotiations, and we are aware of ongoing work at several other universities which may lead to similar statements. We would be very interested in working with you on a similar joint statement, and it would be a reflection of the leadership that this university exercises in our sector.

At a local level, we are very disappointed that the energy of University leadership seems to be focused predominantly on circumventing and mitigating the marking and assessment boycott, rather than on trying to bring the overall dispute to a close.

Our colleagues are rightly standing up for principles of fairness in their employment contracts, and the University’s position on partial performance could lead to significant financial distress by locking them out of their jobs for an extended period, in some cases on the basis of just a few hours of uncompleted work. Further, it seems clear to us that the threat to lock people out of their jobs until a pre-specified date, even where there is no marking and assessment work left for them to carry out, has no basis in law, and we ask that you withdraw your stated intention to do so at the earliest opportunity. Lastly, the recently announced decision to pursue 100% deductions from staff who are not themselves participating in the boycott, but refuse to take on additional marking, is punitive, and may have unintended consequences.

The decisions taken here do not just exist in isolation for the current dispute, they have substantial ramifications for the health and industrial relations of our university moving forwards.

I look forward to hearing from you, and we would welcome the opportunity to discuss the situation with you to seek progress.

Regards,

Robyn Orfitelli,

Branch President, on behalf of the Sheffield UCU Committee