Sheffield UCU correspondence with Ian Wright, September 2023

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