This update details ongoing processes relating to the restructure of school based Professional Services teams, and some faculty PS teams, as part of ‘New Schools’. This is a substantial development that impacts the whole of the University, but whilst impacted PS colleagues will be acutely aware of the current period of uncertainty, central University communications have neglected to keep all staff and students abreast of ongoing developments.
‘The Professional Services Framework’
As of last week the University has updated its FAQs on the New Schools staff web pages. These include a series of new standardised job descriptions for roles in school PS teams which have now been shared with colleagues in those areas. Feedback on these job descriptions and additional specialised roles is accepted until November 15th, after which School leadership teams are expected to develop draft structures to submit to the ‘PS Oversight Group’ by the 13th December.
Management have confirmed that they expect formal Collective Consultation processes to take place from February 2024, with new PS structures intended to be in place from May. We also know that there are well in excess of 1000 members of staff currently in school PS teams. It is not yet clear how the University plans to tackle these restructures, whether all at once or in phases, but whatever they decide we have grave concerns about the capacity of HR and union reps to work on these, to say nothing of the enormous impact on PS staff themselves and the knock-on effects for colleagues not in scope.
Please share your feedback with your managers, or to the dedicated PS Framework HR email address psframework@sheffield.ac.uk, including if roles are being graded at the wrong level or work areas have been missed out. We are aware that a significant number of roles are not currently represented by these job descriptions, including accreditation, external relations, and employability.
We understand that staff in school PS teams have been asked to ensure their job descriptions are up-to-date ahead of the restructuring. We would strongly encourage staff to engage with this process to make sure they accurately reflect the work you currently do, to put you in the best position if you do, unfortunately, find yourself in the scope of a New Schools restructure.
Our Concerns
The trade unions are extremely disappointed that, despite being assured repeatedly that the New Schools project was not about reducing costs or cutting jobs, the timing of the PS changes means that they have become inextricably linked with the University’s cost-cutting exercises in response to the financial crisis. Budgets for PS teams will be lower than they would have been if the New Schools changes had been implemented a year or even six months ago, and teams are highly likely to be designed according to financial constraints, rather than genuine needs within schools. It is particularly galling to see PS teams taking this hit, when the New Schools project has involved significant financial investment, including new academic leadership ‘uplifts’, university and school rebranding, and of course, the money that it costs for staff to devote untold hours to merging departments, rethinking curriculum, and supporting students through the most major structural change this university has seen in over a decade. We also want to raise serious concerns about such financial decisions in light of the 2023 decisions of the Senior Remuneration committee to remove the 10% cap on bonuses for members of UEB, and to substantially uplift the salary of the Vice Chancellor.
In addition to significant concerns about the impact of this restructuring on staff welfare, losing staff, and the impact on workloads, members have also expressed to us their worries about the homogenisation of school PS structures without due regard for discipline-specific demands, such as technical teams, specialised roles, recruitment, and accreditation. We struggle to see how day to day work will be able to continue as normal in schools while these changes are being implemented, as staff in scope of the changes will understandably need to focus on their own wellbeing, engaging with the consultation, applying for roles, and supporting each other. We know this is going to place enormous pressure on School Managers in particular. We also have concerns about the timing of the restructuring falling in Semester 2, with the potential for huge disruption to teaching activities, including assessments, exam boards, and graduation.
Support Available for PS staff
The Campus Trade Unions have regular meetings with HR so please get in touch if there’s anything that members think we should raise here at a general level. We are also happy to ask questions if staff wish to remain anonymous. Members of committee will also be acting as TU representatives during the formal collective consultation processes.
While TU representatives represent the interests of all staff involved in restructures, union members have additional advantages such as access to caseworkers and reps, being part of the union’s democratic process and voting on motions. Encourage your colleagues to join a union! All campus trade unions (UNISON, Unite, and UCU) are open to all staff, and there is no right or wrong union to join. It may be helpful to let colleagues know that all the unions have minimum membership periods before formal casework support can be offered. For UCU, this is 90 days. This means that if staff anticipate wanting to call on casework support during the restructure period of February to May, they should be thinking about joining a union as soon as possible.
Keep talking to each other and to your managers. If there are any unique circumstances you are facing then do get in touch with your departmental rep or contact us at ucu@sheffield.ac.uk for further advice. If any members are interested in taking on a more focused PS rep role then please do get in touch!
We hold a monthly forum for PS members, the next of which is on Monday 2nd December 1pm (meeting dates). Meeting details and minutes are circulated to our PS members mailing list (if you are not on this and think you should be, please let us know).
At the start of October, we wrote to members in relation to the Palestine related Teach-in organised by UCU members which was prevented from going ahead by the University (details of this here). Since then, we have sought to engage with the University and its Security operations in good faith to address any concerns they may have and to request them to ensure that staff are able to practise our academic freedom within the University premises without disproportionate barriers and challenges. However, in the face of repeated pushbacks in relation to Palestine related activities, we have had to make the difficult choice to hold these events at Sheffield Hallam University, which has not adopted the same extreme securitisation as our own university management, in order to ensure the safety of attendees. We are writing to members as we want to be transparent about our discussions with security and why we have refused to accept their proposed restrictions on our events.
As well as rescheduling the previously cancelled teach-in, the Sheffield UCU working group on Palestine is co-hosting the Campus Voice for Palestine – Solidarity against Scholasticide Tour, a national tour supported by UCU and BRICUP. The tour is an incredible opportunity to hear directly from Palestinian academics and learn how we can best support Palestinian academics and Universities during these times, when Israel has destroyed all of the Universities in Gaza. This tour has been organised as the result of resolutions passed overwhelmingly at UCU’s 2024 national congress. Events have already taken place at the Universities of Nottingham, Leeds and Newcastle without controversy or incident.
In accordance with the University’s process for room booking and risk-assessment around hosting an external speaker, the request for room-booking, along with all details about the events and speakers, had been sent to the University on 11th October, with three week’s notice before the event’s date of 5th November. Meanwhile, UCU members met with Security and HR, on the 15th October, to discuss the reasons cited for cancelling our teach-in, intending to determine a set of principles, in relation to University policy, to allow for staff to plan and conduct activities smoothly. We informed Security that we have followed the policy as stated by the University, however we were then told that there are ‘gaps’ in the Policy that may need to be addressed separately. We were told that any event to do with Palestine and Gaza is ‘controversial’ and thus requires an independent assessment by University Security, and agreement to any ‘restrictions’ before it can go ahead. Security asked us to move the location of our events to more discreet locations and to follow a registration policy (for both internal and external events), both of which we agreed to in the hope of allowing the event to go ahead.
Despite this discussion, Security then responded to our room-booking request with a range of additional restrictions that they suggested are also applicable to any internal events relating to Palestine. Of these, three were wholly unacceptable to us:
“Attendance will be pre booked (using Google sheet) and attendees notified to UoS Security Operations manager 6 days prior to the event.
UoS Security will be present as directed by the Security Operations Manager. They will control access to the building and will check Ucards (or photo ID in the case of external guests) against the attendee list prior to entry. Unless it is clear there is some disturbance or at the request of the UCU organisers, UoS Security will not be present in the Workshop room.
No placards, banners or face coverings (other than for religious observance, notified in advance) will be allowed. The security operations manager reserves the right to search bags prior to entry if required”.
Despite the University initially telling the press that our teach-in was cancelled because we had not conducted a risk assessment, the University were not interested in seeing our own risk assessment, and ignored our repeated requests that the University provide us with a copy of their own internal risk assessment. The University have been unable to evidence any potential risks regarding this specific event, or point to any issues occurring from the events we have held previously.
It is our view that these requirements are disproportionate, unnecessary, and lie in contradiction with University policy. Searching attendees of an education related event and requiring them to state in advance if they intend to wear a religious face cover or medical mask is not in line with the University’s Security Strategy, which assures us that “Security must not be a hindrance to academic activity but a necessary ingredient in creating an environment where staff and students can indeed succeed and flourish” and their objective to “Foster a safe and inclusive campus where students and staff from diverse backgrounds feel protected from hate crime, discrimination, and violence, reinforcing university policies on equality and diversity.”
Our highest concerns remains that some of our audience and speakers are going to be Palestinian, who may find such restrictions especially traumatizing, and who are currently living with the reality of the genocide of their peoples. The disproportionate targeting of marginalised students on campus has been well-documented and we refuse to further contribute to this.
Over the last year, UCU has hosted many Palestine related talks, none of which posed a level of risk which is commensurate to the University’s proposed measures.
It is unfortunate to see that an academic tour that is being held within 9 universities between October and November cannot be held within our own campus. Meanwhile, the Sheffield part of the tour will now be held at Sheffield Hallam University where the event is being held without any restrictions. We are extremely grateful to Sheffield Hallam UCU for their support in co-organising this.
The SUCU branch committee have growing concerns around the repression of discussion about Palestine and the ongoing violence in the Middle East within our University. You may have heard about our planned teach-in for the 1st of October that was advertised in our email dated 27th September. Unfortunately, it was prevented from going ahead. We want to explain why and ask for your support in supporting freedom of speech on campus, including educational talks relating to Palestine and for academics who research and teach on this topic.
On 18th September we put in a booking request for a lecture theatre to hold an internal University of Sheffield teach-in for University students titled ‘What Is Happening in Gaza?’ delivered by University staff members who have expertise in this area. The motive was to have an academic discussion on the ongoing genocide in Palestine, and to support our members’ work and research in this area. There were no external speakers invited, and therefore the University’s external speakers procedure did not apply.
We received no response about the booking, despite a reminder sent on the 25th September. We again called up the room booking team as UCU and got a room booked on the 27th. However, we were contacted by University Security on the day before the teach-in was due to take place to tell us that it could not go ahead. Security cited a new ‘events safety guidance’ document, introduced in April 2024, which requires a risk assessment to be conducted for events organised by staff that do “not fall within the normal work duties or study activities at the University of Sheffield. Examples of events include, but are not limited to:
• Ceremonies and celebrations
• Conferences
• Open days
• Fairs
• Networking events
• Team building events.
• Talks, exhibitions, demonstrations, and performances aimed at the general public”
As an internally facing set of talks, given by members of staff at this University for staff and students of this University, and on subjects researched and taught on by the staff giving these talks, we refute that this guidance is in fact relevant for the teach-in, or any research seminar. Even were the University to decide that the guidance is relevant, there was no mention made of needing a risk assessment until the day prior to the event, despite weeks of communication regarding the room booking. Moreover, the policy has been written with schools and services in mind, and does not adequately reflect the structures of the campus trade unions. As such, we would have expected a discussion via our main negotiating body with management about how the trade unions are expected to adhere to it, as happened for the External Speaker Approval Policy.
Lastly, in communications with security, repeated reference was made to the topic of the talk being ‘controversial’, which seems to uniquely and problematically pick out specific types of research. This represents a significant overreach which infringes on academic freedom and the University’s obligations under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023, as well as the University’s own Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom policy, which was written to enforce its obligations under this Act. We are concerned that this policy will be used to silence positions that are deemed ‘controversial’ rather than to protect staff, students, and other campus visitors, placing considerable additional barriers in front of conducting what is, essentially, an academic research seminar.
The cancelled event was in keeping with motions on Palestine passed by Sheffield UCU and is a continuation of the activities and events the branch has supported over the past year. During this time we have experienced increasing intervention by University Security which has obstructed these activities. This has included moving booked venues last minute, insisting that security staff with body cams are present and are able to conduct bag searches, and requiring the identification of staff and students attending events.
We have had members be in touch with concerns about similar barriers being placed on email lists and other forms of communications with other staff and students. Taking all of this together, there is deeply concerning progression from this University wherein critical discussion of the situation in Gaza appears to be automatically deemed to present risk, a position that amounts to profiling and that infringes upon freedom of academic thought and pedagogic expression as protected in HE(FoS)A 2023.
The branch committee will be raising these concerns with management in relation to the Freedom of Speech/Academic Freedom Policy, and in relation to the ways in which the new ‘Events safety guidance’ policy is being applied.
The teach-in has been postponed for now, but we hope to communicate a new date as soon as possible.
The below email was sent to VC Koen Lamberts on Friday 24th May.
Dear Professor Lamberts,
I am writing with regard to several serious issues raised by staff at the University. Over recent months, we have expressed concerns in negotiations with Human Resources regarding the University’s continued affiliation with Rabbi Zecharia Deutsch. Rabbi Deutsch has produced public materials in relation to the ongoing violent conflict in Gaza. We believe the content of these materials is at odds with the stated values of the University of Sheffield, including the objectives of the Belief, No Belief, and Religious Life Centre, and principles outlined in the Staff and Student Codes of Conduct.
It has been particularly disappointing to be told in negotiations that the University does not intend to discuss our concerns because the BNBR Centre is not considered to be part of the terms and conditions of staff employment at this University. This position sidelines the important role of the Centre as a source of support for the entire University community, including staff, and overlooks the fact that the Centre is itself a place of work for employees who we represent and who deserve to feel safe.
At our most recent General Meeting, members brought a motion which passed without opposition, which I have linked to here. Staff, as well as students, from a wide range of faith backgrounds, are expressing risks to their wellbeing and sense of safety that are posed by Rabbi Deutsch’s continued presence at the University, and the incompatibility of this with our commitment to religious tolerance and non-violence. In the interests of promoting safety, inclusivity, and opposing all forms of intolerance, we are calling on the University to reconsider its affiliation with Rabbi Deutsch.
We also query the University of Sheffield management’s lack of meaningful engagement with the student and staff members who are currently taking part in and supporting the encampment on the SU Concourse. These members of our University community are taking part in protest over a critical and ongoing humanitarian crisis which our University cannot and should not ignore, as well as our relationship to the military industrial complex both in general and in relation to this conflict.
The management of other Universities, including at Goldsmiths, University of London and many in other countries, have taken a more productive and proactive approach to encampments on their campus, and have reached agreements that directly address the issues raised by protestors. In contrast, the management of this University does not seem to have met at all with those engaged in protest over extreme and ongoing violence, although I would welcome correction on this point if meetings have occurred that I am not aware of.
While your recent email to staff clarified the legal standing of our University’s research programmes and emphasised a commitment to transparency, it did not itself offer transparency on the university’s investments, nor did it seem to address the key ethical and moral issues that are currently being raised by staff and students. This email explicitly asserts the rights of academic staff (under the aegis of academic freedom of speech) to conduct research on “any subject within the law”: in particular, without any requirements as to ethics or propriety. This assertion seems incompatible with agreements to which the university is a signatory (including but not limited to the Universities UK Concordat to Support Research Integrity), as well as with disciplinary or regulatory codes for research ethics. Academic activity is governed by ethical codes, regardless of whether it is technically within the law; so too should be the university’s provision of staff- and student-facing services.
We are additionally alarmed by the all-staff email of 14 May on the topic of the encampment, which reminded readers not of the reason for the protest, but rather provided information on how to report harassment and bullying, while downplaying the ongoing genocide as ‘a situation’.
We would welcome the chance to speak with you regarding these issues as representatives of staff at the University of Sheffield, but with greater urgency, would prefer that you engage meaningfully with our staff and students who are supporting the encampment and have founded Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine, to discuss and address the foundational issues they have raised about the priorities, goals, and future vision of this University.
I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Robyn Orfitelli
Sheffield UCU Branch President
Response from Ian Wright 30th May 2024
From: Ian Wright
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 at 15:06
Subject: Re: Concerns regarding recent University positions
To: Ucu Trade Union Account
Dear Robyn
The Vice-Chancellor has forwarded me your email and asked me to respond.
The University seeks to support its community of students and staff irrespective of their beliefs, religion or views. We aim to provide an environment on our campus where all can feel safe and welcomed. We know that this can sometimes be difficult when people’s views and values are challenged.
We also have a duty to uphold freedom of speech within the law. It is recognised that sometimes people will have different opinions and will potentially find the views of others to be disagreeable or offensive. We encourage debate with tolerance, openness and respect to avoid the risk of conflict. We do not tolerate discrimination, harassment, bullying, Islamophobia, anti-semitism or any other form of racism or religious hatred.
As you know, Rabbi Deutsch is not a member of staff of the University. We continue to engage with his employers, the University Jewish Chaplaincy, to ensure that appropriate support can be provided to those students who wish to access their offering. Whilst Rabbi Deutsch has not been present on our campus since he returned from Israel earlier this year, we also signpost our Jewish students to two other local faith advisers – one Jewish Chaplain and one Jewish Adviser from different denominations of Judaism.
We also provide appropriate support for students of other religions or beliefs and those who do not follow a religion or belief.
You will be aware that the provision of chaplaincy support to our students, and who provides that support (particularly where they are not an employee of the University) are not matters that fall within the scope of our agreed trade union recognition agreement. It is therefore not something we would negotiate or consult with the Trade Union body on.
In relation to the protest, you are aware that the Vice-Chancellor recently wrote to all staff regarding the issues relating to our ongoing work with a number of external partners and that remains the University position.
The University respects the right of its students to engage in peaceful protest. Our actions have been focused on facilitating this and supporting the safety of those who are protesting, as well as those who are not.
The University’s Israel Gaza conflict webpage (hyperlink), contains a range of information, support and guidance for staff and students affected by the conflict. Please feel free to share this with any members who have concerns or queries regarding the conflict, the protests currently on campus and the University’s position and how we are supporting people from across our community.
Sheffield UCU is intending to expand its work in the field of Health and Safety (H&S), both by increasing our team of H&S reps, and also by raising awareness among members of what your H&S rights are, and how you can advocate for them. While the legal rights of workers have been significantly reduced since the end of the 1970s, H&S legislation remains relatively strong and provides significant opportunities for collective representation in ways that make a real difference to all those working at and attending the University. Trade Union H&S representatives are therefore an important role in all workplaces, and have a legal right to time off to perform their duties.
This activity is not limited to matters such as ensuring fire exits are kept clear, hazardous substances are handled correctly and tripping hazards are removed, but many areas that impinge in the daily operation of the institution, including stress and mental health problems, which have reached epidemic proportions across the HE sector. In the past, employer response to workplace stress has often unfortunately been to treat it as a solely individual issue, rather than recognising the systemic and collective causes which can underpin it.
Stress Risk Assessments at the University
Employers have a legal duty to protect workers from stress at work by undertaking a risk assessment and acting on it. They are required to assess the risk of stress, and its impact on mental and physical ill-health, in the same way as other work-related health and safety risks.
In recent years, we have worked with the new leadership of Health and Safety Services to develop a Stress Risk Management policy to ensure the university is compliant with its obligations.
Stress management includes addressing matters of excessive workload, inadequate training, bullying and other institutional problems with which we are only too familiar. Given the large-scale restructuring underway at the institution, it is essential we know our rights and hold management to account on these questions, and that means we need more people actively taking a role in H&S matters.
Constructive engagement in the approach to H&S
There has been a significant improvement in the institution’s management of H&S in the last two years, and this has provided opportunities for constructive engagement.
During the pandemic Campus Unions pushed the University to increase ventilation, install CO2 monitors in naturally ventilated spaces and issue staff guidance on reporting risk and vacating unsafe working spaces. After very strong initial resistance, we managed to achieve these things, which form a crucial part of protecting people not only from COVID-19 but also influenza and the other respiratory infections that are common across the institution.
We need to build on these achievements and ensure the University is a safe place to work and study, but we cannot rely on management to prioritise staff welfare when institutional pressures are to maximise workloads and marginalise professional concerns in order to compete with ‘rivals’.
Become a Health & Safety Rep
H&S representatives are essential to participate in inspections, sometimes alongside management, but often independently, to hold them to account. We need to ensure all risk assessments are, in the legal language, ‘suitable and sufficient,’ and that the policies we have negotiated are being adhered to. We need people to participate in departmental H&S meetings and to ensure staff priorities are being taken seriously.
If you are interested in getting involved in H&S work, or becoming a H&S rep, please do get in touch, via ucu@sheffield.ac.uk
Employers have an obligation to provide time off normal duties for TU representatives to perform H&S duties – such vital work can be carried out in addition to your day job, but workload remission is essential. Depending on the level at which you are prepared to be involved, UCU provides a range of training, which the employer must also enable you to attend. This might range from shadowing experienced representatives on an inspection to attending a formal course run by the regional union – it is up to you to decide how much you want to be involved, but at all levels of involvement, the work is meaningful and makes a real difference to all colleagues.