Open Letter Regarding the Unite-Veolia Dispute- response from Tom Hunt
Published on
On 21st July 2025, we received the below response from Councillor Tom Hunt (Leader of Sheffield City Council) to the open letter signed by members of Sheffield UCU regarding the Unite-Veolia Dispute (sent 3rd July 2025).
Dear [Sheffield UCU],
It’s good to be in touch. I hope you are well.
Thank you to you and UCU members for contacting me about Veolia and the current industrial action.
Firstly, let me say that the city’s hard working refuse collectors provide an important public service every day for the people of Sheffield. I am extremely grateful for their service.
Secondly, I share your desire to see this dispute resolved as soon as possible. The ongoing dispute is between two unions within Veolia's workforce and not within the Council. But I can assure you that I have been doing as much as I can to find a resolution.
By way of background, it may be helpful to clarify the current situation:
Veolia have a contract to run all household waste and recycling services in Sheffield. Refuse collectors work for Veolia.
Unite are taking industrial action at Veolia because they are seeking official recognition of their union by Veolia.
Veolia have a longstanding recognition agreement with GMB, who represent the majority of the workforce at Veolia. The agreement dates back to 2004.
Veolia’s position is that they are willing to work with both GMB and Unite.
However, as the GMB have the majority membership, the terms of the existing agreement with Veolia require that the GMB must approve this change.
While discussions have taken place between Unite and the GMB, an agreement has not yet been reached.
Unite asked the Central Arbitration Committee (CAC) to review their application for recognition within the Sheffield contract. On the 3rd of April, the CAC as an independent statutory authority, published its decision, rejecting Unite’s application recognising the existing agreement in place between the GMB and Veolia.
As Leader of Sheffield City Council, I have taken an active role to bring all parties together to facilitate negotiations. I continue to encourage all parties to find a negotiated resolution. This has been the Council’s approach throughout the dispute and will continue to be so.
I urge all parties to continue to meet to find a negotiated resolution. We will continue to support the achievement of this outcome and I have stated that I am happy to facilitate further meetings of all the parties.
I hope this helps to outline the Council’s role and position in relation to the dispute.
With best wishes,
Tom
SUCU accept offer from management- industrial action called off
Following the poll on the offer from management, our membership checks of participants, and removal of any duplicate votes, we can confirm that members have voted to accept management’s offer (64% in favour, 33% against, with 3% abstaining). Members have also voted to reschedule some activities in return for the University not deducting pay (58% in favour, 21% against, with 21% abstaining).
This means that we will be notifying management that we are calling off strike action for Friday 9th May and 12-16 May, and that Action Short of a Strike is called off starting Friday 9th May. At the EGM, clarification was sought on whether accepting management’s offer also required us to end our trade dispute. The wording of the offer does not mention the trade dispute, so the chair took the decision that we will not immediately end our dispute as a result of this vote, and we will revisit the question of whether to withdraw our trade dispute as a branch in the coming weeks.
This means that members are asked to return to work as of Friday 9th May. It also importantly means that management have agreed to not take any strike deductions from all members who participated in strike action.
This decision does not prevent the branch from entering into future disputes or obtaining a mandate for further action.
The offer represents a win in that it gives staff currently in scope within the ongoing PS restructures more time for posts to be made available through redeployment, or to have their jobs defended through negotiation. While it does not guarantee that there will be no compulsory redundancies, this deal does make it more likely in practice that individuals will avoid being made redundant, and represents a significant move in management’s position prior to our dispute and action.
Advice on Returning to Work Tomorrow and Next Week
We know that calling off action may leave many members feeling overwhelmed with work commitments that they were not expecting to face this week and next. It is crucial that every one of us takes care of ourselves and does not take on the impossible (and unhealthy) task of trying to prepare for everything coming next week in a single day. There is preparatory time which has been missed, and there are simply not enough hours to make up for that time.
It is important that all members assert their contracted terms which for many includes a nominal 35-hour working week, and do not volunteer substantial amounts of labour above and beyond that which they are contractually obliged to. Working in line with our contracts is a basic labour right which does not need the cover of an ASOS mandate.
Almost every member will have slightly different circumstances and we cannot provide concrete advice on every case, but we suggest that all of you follow the below three guiding principles:
Please continue to work to contract. This means not working beyond your usual hours, working over the weekend, or trying to complete several days of work within a single day.
Your line manager may ask you to prioritise certain types of work, up to a certain point. Such instructions should be made with recognition that planned action has been called off at short notice, and it should be in keeping with the general nature of your job (for example, research staff who teach a little should not be asked to spend a significant amount of time replacing any lost learning, and staff who normally only spend a small part of their day replying to student emails should not be asked to clear a week to deal with a long backlog at the expense of all other duties). Managers should also be clear about the work you are not expected to tackle, in order to make space for priority tasks.
You cannot do everything, and that is okay. Some things may not happen to the standard they normally would, and some things may not happen at all. Your line manager should be able to assist and support you, and many line managers are themselves UCU members who will be navigating a similarly abrupt return.
For members in student facing roles, remember that our students overwhelmingly support us. Just as we were going to ask for their understanding and support in taking strike action this week, we can ask for their understanding and support as we unexpectedly navigate days we did not think we would be working, as well as in any rescheduling of missed activities.
Advice on Rescheduling Teaching
Whilst members have voted to accept the University’s offer to not deduct strike pay in return for members replacing and rescheduling lost work as appropriate and practicable within a reasonable time period. We know this may put some members in difficult positions, and we want to offer some advice, as well as the more general advice offered above.
It is the Committee’s position that staff cannot be forced to replace like for like activities if this is not possible within the context of staff’s contracts and the remaining time available in the term.
We will be expecting some advice from Heads of School to go to staff in terms of how to prioritise particular lost learning and activities. We anticipate that management will ask staff to prioritise final-year teaching. We ask that members get in touch if they feel this is in conflict with the principles offered above, or if they feel under particular and unreasonable pressure.
Staff have substantial protection from unsafe workload pressures due to health and safety law. Anyone asked to reschedule teaching should be given the same level of support they would be for normally timetabled teaching, including in finding a time that the registered students can attend, as well as a space for the teaching to occur. With workloads already very high, and only two weeks left before the end of the teaching period, we consider that it will be very difficult in most cases for management to facilitate this without creating a workload crunch point. This would lead to an unacceptable situation unless other tasks related to the teaching portion of the workload are explicitly deprioritised. Again, if members are asked to do more than they feel they can in the time available to them, they should get in touch with us.
Next steps
Whilst this is a win, something which should not be under-emphasised, we recognise that this is only a temporary and partial victory in what is a longer fight and period of uncertainty for the University community. We plan to discuss our next steps as a branch very soon as to how we navigate this into the next academic year.
We will continue to do everything we can to pressure management into avoiding compulsory redundancies and other reductions to staff budgets as part of our ongoing negotiations with management. However it is critical that we remain prepared to take additional strong industrial action over the coming year.
We would like to thank members for their support and solidarity, as well as the incredibly hard work put in by our reps, negotiators, and committee members over the past weeks and months.
Members vote to begin industrial action at the end of April 2025
Published on
Following two well attended and constructive General Meetings, Sheffield UCU members have voted in favour for an industrial action strategy targeting the last three weeks of term.
Action Short of Strike from Thursday 1st May onwards (not 28th April as previously stated)
Followed by a 9 day walk out from Tuesday the 6th May until Friday the 16th May, should the University fail to meaningfully commit to addressing our demands
Our regional office has now notified the University of our action.
On 16 April, we are meeting with management in a negotiation over our current dispute. Our dispute demands ask management to avoid compulsory redundancies by working with staff in scope and TU reps to re-design the current restructure proposals to preserve all jobs, and to make this same commitment to avoid compulsory redundancies as a result of change management for any process that is launched between now and the end of the 25-26 academic year.
Asking management to not make staff redundant is a reasonable request to make at any time, but especially during the current period of such disruptive change. The extensive changes to structure that management are making will create substantial upset to working practices across the entire university, and will take time to settle. We are asking management to approach this change responsibly and take this time.
Moreover, we believe that the university is taking a particularly conservative approach to its financial risk, and that there is not a strong financial argument behind pursuing these compulsory redundancies. Management have indicated that the potential savings from redundancy in the current structures is relatively limited. We are also aware that, via Voluntary Severance and ‘vacancy management’, the university has already reached a level of future year-on-year savings which nearly meets its stated target of £23m. As a union, we do not wish to see the university reduce staffing levels because of the workload implications, but we would far rather see staff leaving voluntarily than to be forced out of their livelihoods.
Lastly, we have asked management to commit to reducing their own pay and forgoing bonuses until the university is back in surplus. To the extent that it is truly necessary to reduce staffing costs at this university as opposed to reducing other costs, then true leadership would be to reduce costs at the top before threatening any staff jobs. We have also asked management to temporarily suspend leadership uplifts until the university has returned to surplus. These measures alone are equivalent to between 52-62 jobs at Grade 6.
We will report the outcome of next week’s negotiation to members, but to provide maximum support for the negotiation, we need members to prepare to take impactful strike action. As a first step, we are asking members to please hang the attached poster in your workplaces.
Following a vote by our well attended January General meeting, on Tuesday 21st members received a message from UCU asking them to vote in an online local Consultative Ballot over avoiding compulsory redundancies at the University of Sheffield. The branch committee, and our local dispute committee, are asking members to vote YES on all questions in this ballot.
In the Autumn, University management announced an intention to cut staff costs by £23 million over the course of two academic years. As part of this, an additional set of restructures – on top of the at least 21 that they are already planning as part of the highly unpopular New Schools plan – has been announced. This amounts to more disruption and risk to jobs in a single year than this University has seen in a decade.
In December 2024, this branch launched a local grievance with our employer over these issues, alongside UoS Unite. In January, two local negotiating meetings took place in an attempt to resolve the dispute, and as of our second meeting, management were not willing to commit to no compulsory redundancies, nor to substantially reducing their target for staff cuts.
It is the branch’s view that:
management have not adequately demonstrated the financial need to pursue such aggressive levels of cuts;
management’s stated timeline of returning to a surplus position within the short timeframe of two years is unnecessary;
management have still not fully explored non-staff alternatives, including comprehensively reviewing the amount of money paid to third party vendors (including management consultancies, private security firms, and IT consultancies), or how this could be reduced to save jobs and/or bring work in-house;
management have not full explored all options within the staffing budget, such as reduced hours, voluntary unpaid leave, or re-opening the VS scheme;
management have not adequately explained why UEB salaries should remain at their current level, rather than being reduced to save jobs, nor have they committed to forgoing their bonuses until the university returns to a surplus position;
management’s transparency and openness regarding the university’s financial position needs to improve, in order to build staff trust.
We believe that the current proposals can still be significantly improved through meaningful negotiation, and welcome continued talks with management to resolve this dispute. The ballot received by members is consultative and designed to gauge the views of the branch. A YES vote does not mean we would immediately call industrial action; if support is strong, we will declare a trade dispute, and move to a formal ballot locally. At this point, the branch will seek to build consensus on precisely what forms and patterns of ASOS and strike action a) are likely to be most impactful and b) members are willing to engage in. As this would be a local dispute, members of this branch would have ultimate say on these points.
University of Sheffield Genocide and Apartheid Complicity Report
Published on
Sheffield Campus Coalition for Palestine has published the University of Sheffield Genocide and Apartheid Complicity Report (PDF, 5.5MB).
This report finds that the AMRC and its associates are leading fundamental research on manufacturing processes, materials and technologies explicitly for the arms industry. Between 2012 and 2022, the University received £72 million in direct funding from arms manufacturers, more than any other UK institution. Currently, the University is conducting research costing tens, if not hundreds, of millions of pounds that is connected with arms manufacturers and/or perpetrators of apartheid in Gaza.