Extraordinary General Meeting – USS/FourFights

LUCU members are invited to attend an Extraordinary General Meeting to discuss the USS & Four Fights disputes on Friday 6^th May at 1pm. The meeting will be held on Microsoft Teams.

The Four Fights sector conference has voted to:

• call a marking and assessment boycott

• call 10 days of strike action

• keep the Four Fights and USS disputes, and action called in them, coupled

We have been asked by the UCU Higher Education committee to consult our members ahead of a branch delegates meeting on the 10^th May and the HEC meeting later that week. A key question for consideration is:

When does your branch believe would be the most effective start date for 10 days of strike action in your institution?

A. Monday 6 June (this is the earliest possible date)

B. Monday 13 June

C. Other (please give more information – operational issues may make it impossible to accede to specific requests)

The EGM offers members the opportunity to discuss how our branch can best manage the results of the HEC decisions and best manage the dispute at a local level.

The results of the Four Fights sector conference are available, and we should receive the results of the USS sector conference before our EGM so both can be discussed at the meeting.

An agenda and minutes of our previous GM, a calendar invite and link to join have been emailed to all members.

LUCU Committee

20th April 2022

Extraordinary General Assembly

The General Assembly is the University’s representative forum whose purpose is to allow all staff to “discuss and declare an opinion on any matter relating to the University” and “if it so decides, submit resolutions to the Council or Senate” (Statute 15).

In light of recent USS developments, Loughborough UCU has called an extraordinary meeting of the General Assembly to discuss two matters:

Whether, given the role that the General Assembly has in the University’s democratic structures, it is appropriate to hold General Assemblies when UCU members are unable to attend due to participating in official strike action.
Whether the Council has adequately fulfilled its obligations in light of recent changes to the USS pension scheme.

The full text of the two motions we have asked to be discussed is given below.

University management has scheduled the Extraordinary General Assembly for 4pm on Friday 29th April.

If you would like your views on USS to be heard, please attend the meeting. We will send a calendar invite in addition to this message.

We are yet to receive details of the location of the meeting or the Teams link enabling online attendance, but will circulate them when they are known.

Motion 1: Organisation of General Assemblies

This Assembly notes:

– That the purpose of the General Assembly is to be a body that “consists of all staff” (Statute 15);

– UCU’s current industrial action over pay, casualisation, workload, equality pay gaps and proposed reductions to benefits in the Universities Superannuation Scheme.

This Assembly believes:

– That the General Assembly cannot fulfil its purpose if its meetings are scheduled during periods of lawful industrial action by recognised trade unions.

This Assembly resolves:

– To re-schedule future meetings that would otherwise occur during periods of industrial action.

Motion 2: Universities Superannuation Scheme

This Assembly notes:

– The changes to the benefits in the USS pension fund from 1st April 2022 which have reduced future benefit accrual by between 15% and 35%;

– That Loughborough University will be spending approximately £5.8m per year on USS “deficit recovery contributions” from 1st April 2022;

– That USS believes that the purported deficit of £14.1bn as of 31st March 2020 has reduced to £2.0bn as of 28th February 2022, a level which would require no deficit recovery contributions;

– That USS’s calculation of this £2.0bn deficit assumes that its assets will grow by only 0% in real terms, an assumption that the University’s management has previously described as “excessively prudent”;

– That USS’s assets have grown by 33% since March 2020.

– That Council has responsibility for the management and administration of the revenue and property of the University.

This Assembly believes:

– That it is not appropriate for the University to spend £5.8m per year on servicing a deficit that, on any reasonable set of financial assumptions, is non-existent;

– That by allowing the University to spend this money in this manner the Council has not adequately fulfilled its duty to properly manage and administer the revenue and property of the University.

This Assembly resolves:

– To instruct Council to properly discharge its duty to manage and administer the revenue and property of the University.

1st April 20221st April 2022

LUCU News: Pensions Update

Today is April Fools’ Day. It’s also the day when Universities UK’s cuts to USS come into effect. What’s happening to our pension scheme is as ludicrous as the great April Fools’ pranks of the past (spaghetti trees, the island of San Serif), but, unfortunately, not as funny.

As a result of these cuts, the pension you will earn today is between 15% and 35% lower than the pension you earned yesterday. Coupled with the 21/22 pay award of just 1.5% and an inflation rate currently running at 6.2%, the assault on our pensions means that this year will see the biggest cut in our real-terms renumeration since at least the 1970s – potentially the biggest cut ever.

The changes taking effect in USS from today have other implications, too. From now on, the University will be spending around £5.8m per year on servicing the ‘deficit’ that USS calculated existed on 31 March 2020, at the height of the pandemic. In the Trustees’ interim monitoring report of 28 February 2022, USS accepted that this ‘deficit’ had shrunk from £14.1bn to £2.0bn. Remarkably, to create even this trivially small £2.0bn ‘deficit’, USS had to lower its growth assumptions below even the ‘excessively prudent’ assumptions used in the 2020 valuation: USS is now assuming 0% growth in real terms (since 2020 it has achieved 33% growth).

You may need to take a moment for this outrage to sink in. This £5.8m per year is real money, taken from the University’s bank account. So, the next time you are told there is no money to fund your PhD student to attend a conference, no money to replace your faulty computer, or no money to buy a new heater for your cold office, please remember that there is enough money in the University to spend £5.8m servicing a deficit that doesn’t exist.

What now?

There are two immediate ways in which the dispute could be resolved.

First, USS is being taken to court by a group of UCU activists. The hearing is scheduled for 5 April, and you can find out details of the case at the CrowdJustice page.

Second, Universities UK could insist that USS issues a new deficit recovery plan in light of post-valuation experience. Because the current ‘deficit’ is so low, this would be likely to reduce deficit recovery payments to zero, thereby providing scope for devising a new schedule of contributions and higher benefits. Critically, to improve benefits does not require the same lengthy consultation and legal process as is needed when benefits are cut.

To date, Universities UK has refused to call for a new valuation, or for post-valuation experience to be taken into account in drawing up the deficit recovery plan; instead, it has preferred simply to cut staff benefits. Without concerted pressure from UCU members, in the form of a high turnout and a strong ‘yes’ vote in the current ballot for continuing industrial action, UUK will continue to erode our living standards.

Sign the petition

Please urgently join UCU’s call for Universities UK (UUK) to revoke the cuts by signing the petition here: https://speakout.web.ucu.org.uk/uss-cuts-are-not-necessary/

Please vote

The ballot closes a week today: 8 April. We urge you to return your ballot papers, if you have not already done so. The last safe day to post is Wednesday 6 April. Thank you.

LUCU Committee

18th March 2022

A Letter To Our Members

Dear colleague

In support of our Union’s efforts to reverse brutal pension cuts and to improve pay and working conditions in the sector, we have been called out on strike for a further week (beginning next Monday, 21 March). No-one, to put it mildly, is rejoicing at the prospect. On the contrary, we know that many of you feel bruised by the action already taken and that you are dismayed at the request to strike again.

You may be in two minds about whether you participate in this latest action. We understand this deep unease: indeed, we share it. Notwithstanding this, it is vital that every member of Loughborough UCU answers this call to strike.

‘Going on strike again is unaffordable’

The idea of losing another week’s money is dispiriting. Few of us, despite our opponents’ spin, are wealthy enough to keep foregoing significant chunks of income. But while we appreciate that the thought of further salary loss will be giving you pause, we hope that it will not, in the end, prevent your involvement in the strike. And this for several reasons:

Presently, we are facing the loss of, at most, several thousand pounds for participating in strike action. This is hardly a trivial matter. However, if the horrifying pension cuts are not reversed, we face the loss of many tens, if not hundreds of thousands. The withdrawal of our labour will cost us plenty – but the failure of our campaign will cost us so much more.
You may not be aware of the scale of financial support made available by UCU’s Fighting Fund – or you may be reluctant, given the level of your salary, to make a claim on it. However, the fund is there for all members who are experiencing significant financial pressures, and we encourage you to make use of it.
Details of the strike pay scheme and how to apply can be found here. Basically, you can claim £50 a day if you earn more than £30k p.a., and £75 a day if your salary is lower. This is not fully compensatory, of course, but it represents not insignificant mitigation for financial loss.

‘Going on strike again is too disruptive to students’

All of us in student-facing roles – whether as lecturers or administrators, librarians or IT specialists – relish this work. All of us are dismayed at the thought of causing further disruption to students.

It is an unavoidable fact, however, that only by causing this disruption will the strike be successful (by prompting students in large enough numbers to contact the University’s managers and urge them to do so much more to help secure a fair hearing for the Union’s case, especially on pensions). A mass refusal to complete our PDRs will not jog the Vice-Chancellor’s elbow; failure to update Co-Tutor on time, or to submit that new bid for research funding, will not exert any pressure either.

We completely understand why, reluctant to cause further gaps in the education of students you like and value, some of you may be feeling that you cannot strike on the 21^st. However, we ask you to pause and consider how a decision to work seriously diminishes the effectiveness of UCU’s action and brings our defeat that little bit closer. An alternative course of action, we propose, is to let your students know what you are planning to do (and why) and how they can help – and then to strike.

‘Going on strike again serves no strategic purpose’

There is certainly no expectation that your support for the Union should be uncritical. Questions can fairly be asked about the conduct of the ongoing industrial action, including about the latest plan to stagger strikes by institution across two weeks. However, without a rapid follow-up to the recent series of strike days, impetus for the struggle would be lost. University managers nationwide would relax. Effective strike action, by contrast, will ensure their continued attention. The Joint Negotiating Committee of USS meets on 29 March – and it is vital that its management representatives have very clear evidence, from a well-supported strike, of our determination and stamina in this fight.

The Union is acting on the basis of a clear mandate supplied by members across the country (including – and by a significant majority – members at Loughborough). The campaign it is presently waging in our interests is crucial, perhaps even epochal. It requires – and deserves – our full participation.

To repeat: we understand and empathise with you if you feel disinclined to strike again. We acknowledge that what’s said above may not have changed your mind. For us on the Branch Committee, however, the situation is clear: to go on strike on the 21^st will be difficult, but it is necessary. The campaign in defence of our pensions, in particular, cannot be allowed to fail – but it only has a chance of success if it is fully supported by all UCU members, including on this campus.

Thank you very much for your time.

LUCU Committee

16th March 2022

USS & Four Fights Strike Update – 15th March

USS & Four Fights Strike Update

Additional Strike Days Announced

We will be taking an additional 5 days of strike action over USS & Four Fights from Monday 21^st to Friday 25^th March to put additional pressure on employers. Thank you to all our members who’ve been part of the action.

Picket Details

We will be picketing the gates of Loughborough University again from the 21^st to 25^th March. Picketing will start at 8am and conclude around 11am. Please let Marc Gibson know if you will be able to join the pickets.

Re-balloting of Members

Our current strike mandate runs out on the 3^rd of May and the UCU HEC have decided to re-ballot all members at Loughborough (and the 148 other HEIs) on both Four Fights and USS to extend the strike mandate. The ballot will open on Wednesday 16^th March. Please check your postal details are correct on MyUCU now, and please look out for your ballot pack arriving in the post. It should contain 2 ballots, one for USS and one for Four Fights. Please complete both and return as soon as possible. The ballot period will close on Friday 8^th April.

USS Legal Action – Crowdfunding Appeal

This is a joint effort from many university branches who believe in fair pensions and a living planet. Its organising group includes Dr Neil Davies, Bristol UCU, and Dr Ewan McGaughey, KCL UCU and the below is taken from their latest update.

We wanted to update you about the legal action against the USS directors over cuts to our pensions and management of the USS. As you may have heard, we won our first oral hearing, and now we need to raise more to cover costs for the next on 28 March.

If you can donate it will make a huge difference. The current pensions cuts leave many of us £100,000’s worse off in retirement (see modeller). If we win, we could get an injunction against the cuts that will happen on 1 April. We have 3 weeks to save the pension, so please donate now, and share with everyone you know!

Legal case progress to now – In August last year, we raised £50,000 to start legal action against the USS directors. Many thanks to the over 1700 people who contributed. These donations paid for our legal team to develop our claim, which we submitted last Autumn. On the 28^th of February, our barrister presented the case at an initial hearing at the High Court judge and requested permission to proceed to the next stage – a full contested hearing. We were successful, and the judge recognised the urgency of our claim and granted us a contested hearing on the 28th of March. He ruled that we have a prima facie case and that we were acting in good faith. If we are successful at the next hearing, we will be able to proceed with the legal action against the directors, which may be paid for by USS Limited (the company that runs our pensions). We have four claims:

That the 2020 valuation was flawed and unnecessary
USS costs are excessive
The changes discriminate against women, younger and minority colleagues
The USS has failed to have a credible plan to divest from fossil fuels, and this causes significant financial detriment

Crowdfunding – However, to proceed with the next hearing, we urgently need to raise more money to cover the legal costs of the full hearing. So we would be very grateful if you could contribute to our crowdfund. Time is short, so if you could donate here asap – we would greatly appreciate it! If there is any money remaining in the crowdfund after the legal action is complete, we will use it for further legal action over the USS, for example, seeking judicial review of The Pensions Regulator. If there are no further legal options, or we get everything we want (a reasonable valuation, a cost-effective pension scheme, a pensions proposal that is not discriminatory, and divestment from fossil fuels), then we will donate any remaining funds to a charity.

LUCU Committee

1st March 2022

Strike Pay – How to Claim from the Fighting Funds

The national officers have authorised payments from the national Fighting Fund in support of members in the HE disputes (USS and Four Fights) which started on 1 December 2021. Payments from the national scheme apply from your second strike day and currently up to a maximum of 11 days. In addition, as a branch, we have passed a motion to use our local strike fund to reimburse hourly-paid staff for the first day they strike up to the same daily maximum. Please note the December, February and March dates are all considered a single set of actions meaning your “first day” of action (for which no payment is available from the national fund) is only counted once, not separately for each set of dates.

In order to make a claim to the Fighting Fund you need to:

be paying subscriptions at the correct rate (if any subscription is payable);
have participated in official strike action and lost pay for this
provide evidence of deduction from your salary or loss of earnings for strike action.

Claiming from the Local Strike Fund (hourly paid staff, day 1 claims)

Please send the following to our treasurer David Wilson – D.Wilson@lboro.ac.uk

confirmation from your School or Department of the hours not worked due to striking
the number of hours missed and the hourly rate of pay you receive

Claiming from the National Strike Fund (all other claims)

Claims to the Fighting Fund in respect of all disputes can only be made once members receive payslips showing deductions for strike action. Please read the appropriate Guidance before making your application. The Higher Education Guidance can be found here.

If you are in a position where you can go without making a claim or you feel able to claim for a lesser amount please consider doing so in order that we can prioritise those whose loss of pay may cause particular hardship. The Fund will be able to support more members for longer if you can contribute in this way.

Click here to make your application.

Donating to the National Fighting Fund

You can make a donation to the Fighting Fund here or by sending a cheque payable to UCU and marking the back of the cheque ‘donation to UCU fighting fund’. Please send cheques to UCU, Carlow Street, London NW1 7LH.

LUCU Committee

25th February 202225th February 2022

USS Dispute – Update (24/2/22)

USS Dispute: What has been happening?

17th January: branch officers meet with local management to discuss proposals that UCU could put forward to resolve the dispute. We explain how strike action could be avoided by both employers and employees agreeing to pay slightly higher contribution rates for a year to maintain existing benefits (employers: 23.7% for six months, 25.2% for six months; employees: 11% for six months, 11.8% for six months). Although the employer rate would be higher than under the UUK proposals, the average employer contribution rate between October 2021 and April 2023 would be less under these proposals (23.4%) than had been budgeted for (23.7% under the 2018 valuation).

24th January: branch officers meet local managers again to continue the discussion.

24th January: UCU receives a report from USS detailing members’ responses to the official consultation on UUK’s proposed cuts. This reveals strong support for maintaining existing benefits, even if it required contribution increases.

26th January: In light of the consultation responses, UCU formally tables its proposals in a letter to the Chair of the Joint Negotiating Committee. The union’s proposed resolution has three parts: (i) a joint call for a new moderately prudent valuation to supersede the discredited March 2020 valuation; (ii) maintenance of existing benefits until at least April 2023, with employers to pay 23.7% contributions for six months, then 25.2% for six months; employees to pay 11.0% for six months and 11.8% for six months; (iii) should USS refuse to conduct a new valuation then from April 2023 contribution rates would be capped at 25.2% (employers) and 9.8% (employees) with benefits reduced to the best possible available under these rates.

26th January: UCU’s proposals are discussed with local managers at the Academic and Related Staff Negotiating Subcommittee.

26th January: Without consultation with universities, UUK says that UCU’s “proposal does not appear to be a serious attempt to reach agreement as it doesn’t reflect the views employers have expressed in consultations.”

27th January: Loughborough responds to UUK. Management welcomes UCU’s proposals as a first step to resolving the dispute, but argues that point (iii) in UCU’s proposals is unrealistic.

31st January: UUK refuses to formally consult with employers on UCU’s proposal until USS confirms that the costings in the proposal add up. This is despite the proposal being based on figures provided by USS to both UCU and UUK in August 2021.

2nd February: UUK formally consults employers on a trivial modification to their own proposals, despite explicitly admitting that the new proposal was based on costings not validated by USS. For a 40 year old earning £40k/year, UUK’s modified proposal represents a 29% cut rather than the originally proposed 30% cut. UUK continues to refuse to consult employers about UCU’s proposals.

10th February: USS confirms to UUK that the UCU proposal is based on valid costings.

10th February: Two weeks after they received the proposals, UUK starts a consultation with employers on point (ii) of UCU’s proposals. They do not tell employers about point (iii) of the proposal (recall that point (iii) caps employers’ future costs, and is therefore critical). Mike Otsuka, UCU National Negotiator, writes to UUK expressing concern about this “serious misrepresentation of UCU’s proposals”.

12th February: UUK modifies its consultation materials in response to UCU’s concern, but continues to misrepresent the cost of the UCU solution. They write that UCU’s proposals would involve contribution rates of “at least 43%” whereas employer contribution rates would in fact be capped at 25.2% under the UCU proposals. Mike Otsuka writes again to UUK expressing concern at the continuing misrepresentation.

13th February: UUK describes UCU’s complaints about the inaccuracy of their consultation materials as being “simply UCU misinformation, which looks like a cynical attempt to increase turnout for their strike action”. This is a straightforward lie.

14th February: Industrial action starts. The branch begins to issue regular reports from the picket lines.

14th February: UUK modifies its consultation materials again, implicitly accepting that the previous versions contained errors.

15th February: In light of UUK’s confused communications, local managers write to LUCU seeking clarification about whether UCU’s proposals are identical to the solution discussed in the meetings of 17th, 24th and 26th January in local meetings. LUCU explains that they are.

16th February: At an Emergency General Meeting of LUCU the branch passes a motion providing strike pay to hourly paid staff from the first day of the action, partly funded by a generous donation from our friends in Loughborough’s Unite the Union branch. Other colleagues who need support to take strike action are directed to the union’s national fighting fund.

18th February: Loughborough responds to UUK’s consultation:

Our initial response to the UCU proposal welcomed it as a potential first step to a negotiated solution and we encouraged UCU and UUK to work constructively to build an implementable solution, noting the very tight timeframes involved. We called on industrial action to be suspended whilst this took place.

· We continue to welcome UCU’s acceptance that benefit changes are likely to be necessary in securing a resolution (UCU’s letter says they will accept the ‘[securing of] current benefits or, if not possible, the best achievable as a result of the … valuation’).

· We have stated in previous consultations that we believe the current valuation was excessively prudent and call for a new moderately prudent valuation at the earliest opportunity.

· We would be willing to consider some increase in employer contribution, but 25.2% is not sustainable. Any figure that is arrived at should be based on an extension of the current cost sharing model so employee contributions rise in proportion.

We call upon UCU and UUK to urgently seek a solution based on these three points.

Industrial action serves no benefit while this happens and should be paused.

(Aside: the third bullet point in the University’s consultation response involves a strange invocation of USS’s existing cost sharing model. In fact UCU’s proposal is consistent with current USS rules. Specifically, under UCU’s proposal the cost of maintaining current benefits would be split 65:35 between employer and employee, as required by USS Rule 76.4. Rule 76.4 only applies to situations where existing benefits are maintained and not to situations where benefits are changed (i.e. not to point (iii) in UCU’s proposal). Clearly benefit reductions fall entirely onto members rather than employers, so it would not be reasonable to expect the cost sharing rules that apply when there are no benefit reductions to also apply when there are.)

21st February: UUK announces that 93 of 97 employers “do not support” the UCU proposal (it is unclear how Loughborough’s response was categorised). An analysis of consultation responses reveals that at least some employers misunderstood the proposal (for example, some employers explicitly state in their responses that they could not afford employer contributions of 29.1%, when the UCU proposals caps them at 25.2%). Given this, we simply do not know how many employers would have supported UCU’s proposals if a competently conducted consultation had taken place.

21st February: USS announces that, even using its own highly pessimistic valuation method, the scheme’s funding position has improved from 83%-funded to 97%-funded since the March 2020 valuation date. Nevertheless, UUK decides to press ahead with cuts to pensions based on the earlier 83% value.

22nd February: The first phase of industrial action ends.

22nd February: At USS’s Joint Negotiating Committee the ‘independent’ chair votes in favour of UUK’s cut to your pension.

23rd February: Josephine Cumbo, the FT’s Pensions Correspondent, writes “I have covered UK university sector disputes over pension cuts since 2017 and can say that I have not seen members so angry as they are today over fresh cuts to their retirement benefits. The anger has reached a new depth. This does feel like a turning point.”

In summary: the last few weeks have taught us that UK universities have been willing to cut staff pensions by up to 35%, despite accepting that the valuation the cuts are premised on is flawed. To achieve this, UUK, the employer association, has been willing to misrepresent UCU’s proposals and then lie about doing so.

We’re now faced with a decision about how to respond. UCU’s Higher Education Committee meets on Friday.

LUCU Committee

11th February 2022

LUCU Strike Bulletin – 10 February 2022

Call for pickets

We are asking you to come forwards to help the branch mount pickets across all gates of the University during the strike. Please contact Marc Gibson M.A.Gibson@lboro.ac.uk

Deductions

The branch understands that deductions for the forthcoming strikes will again be staggered in March and April and is a token of the good relations that continue here between the branch and LU’s senior managers, for which we continue to be grateful.

Out of Office Message

Please find a suggested Out Of Office Message that you may adopt or use as the basis of your own message during strike action:

I am taking part in the UCU industrial action to protect pensions, and to end gender, race and disability pay gaps, precarious employment contracts and excessive workloads. During the strike period beginning 14^th February, I will not be answering emails.

If you are a student and need to discuss a wellbeing issue, please contact: <insert details here>

If you would like further information about the reasons for the UCU industrial action, you can follow these links: here, or here.

Your closing address
Your name

Information for students

It is important to keep students as ‘on side’ as possible, and, while members are not obliged to declare strike action in advance, in keeping with the spirit of ‘good will’ shown by management in staggering deductions, we invite members to inform students and colleagues that you will not be teaching/keeping your appointments. Here is a suggested template that you may adapt for use with your students, either in an email or on your LEARN pages (you may wish to put in figures that reflect your own prospective losses):

Dear <name>

You may be aware that the University and College Union (UCU), which represents lecturers and professional services staff such as librarians and IT specialists, has called a strike beginning on Monday, 14 February and extending in its first phase until Tuesday 22 February (inclusive).

As a member of the union, I am writing to let you know that I will be observing this strike. This means that none of my teaching on those days will take place. I would like to take this opportunity to explain why I believe it necessary to take strike action, and would appreciate it if you can take a moment to consider my message.

The first and most important reason staff are striking is to resist drastic cuts proposed to their pensions. Depending on their age, lecturers stand to lose between 25% and 35% of their income in retirement. Personally, I face losing 27% of my pension, INSERT YOUR OWN FIGURE HERE IF YOU WISH and this level of financial loss would result in unsustainable damage to my living standards in retirement. These cuts are based on a flawed model of what the pension scheme is worth and how it is likely to perform in future. UCU has tabled alternative, workable proposals for the pension scheme that, at present, employers are refusing to engage with. Loughborough University’s management agrees with the union that the valuation of the pension scheme is problematic; however, this issue cannot be solved at a local level. Therefore, the union has called national strike action in order to exert pressure on university employers to negotiate in good faith and to find a fair solution.

The second reason for taking strike action is what UCU calls the ‘Four Fights’ (addressing major problems in the university sector of falling pay, excessive workload, inequality, and insecure employment contracts).

Taking strike action is a very difficult thing to do and something we consider only as a last resort. For one thing, our pay is deducted when we are on strike. But it is also difficult because we want to be doing our jobs, the most important and enjoyable part of which is giving students the best possible learning experience. I know that having your teaching cancelled will cause you disappointment and frustration, but I hope that you can understand my reasons for taking strike action, even if you may not agree with them.

If you would like to learn more about the industrial action, please take a look at this video which has been made by a Loughborough lecturer, and which has been shared with LSU for circulation to their members.

Your sincerely

1st February 20221st February 2022

LUCU News: February 2022

In this newsletter, we report on: USS and Four Fights disputes, Industrial Action, and Health and Safety: Covid.

USS Dispute: Background

Our earlier communications have set out the background to the dispute. In the first of our video explainers, pensions rep Matthew Inglis explained that the cause of the dispute is the extreme level of pessimism in USS’s March 2020 valuation. Since that video was made, USS’s assets have continued to grow. As of December 2021, the scheme’s assets were worth £92.2bn, a figure that the ‘prudent’ assumptions of the 2020 valuation said would not be reached until 2133. In response to these absurdly pessimistic assumptions, UCU called for a new moderately prudent evidence-based valuation. Instead of joining with UCU to insist upon a sensible valuation, the employers’ group UUK prioritised avoiding any financial consequences for themselves by proposing severe cuts of up to 35% to your pension.

Hopefully, you will have logged into the official USS modeller to see how you will be affected by UUK’s proposals. If you haven’t been able to, the graph below provides a guide for different combinations of salary and year of birth. Note that the assumptions that underpin the USS modeller were agreed with UUK and are not disputed. Our employers accept these figures. But despite this, the post-truth comms team at UUK continues to falsely assert that for “the vast majority” of USS members the cut will be between 10% and 18%. Those of us who used the USS modeller know that this is simply untrue.

UCU’s proposal

At our General Meeting on 12th January, members expressed strong support for UCU issuing counterproposals designed to avoid industrial action. This was fed back to national UCU by branch officers, and a national Branch Delegates Meeting was held to discuss the form of these counterproposals. A version of the proposals that attracted strong local support were issued by UCU on 26th January. This solution would involve retaining existing benefits for at least a year, at the cost of contribution rises for members and employers. Critically, the cost to employers would still be within the overall cost envelope of the pension contributions forecast for the 2021/22 and 2022/23 financial years.

The UCU proposal is consistent with the views of USS members as expressed in the recently completed consultation. The responses from the consultation show that most respondents are in favour of maintaining current benefits, even if this means paying slightly more until a new valuation could be completed.

Nevertheless, UUK’s response to UCU’s attempt to resolve the dispute was to issue a statement saying that “The union’s proposal does not appear to be a serious attempt to reach agreement as it doesn’t reflect the views employers have expressed in consultations”. Apparently, UUK is willing to reach an agreement, but only if that agreement reflects their views!

Notably, UUK’s statement was issued without consultation with employers. Following productive discussions with the branch throughout January, the University has replied to UUK as follows:

Loughborough University welcomes the proposal tabled by UCU as an indication of potential first steps towards resolving the current dispute. We have supported in previous consultations a move to conditional indexation, a moderately prudent valuation at the earliest opportunity, and governance changes to USS. These are issues that will need to be resolved in the next period, and we are supportive of UUK and UCU working together to this end.

We strongly welcome UCU’s acceptance that benefit changes are likely to be necessary and see this as a significant change in their position (UCU’s letter says they will accept the ‘[securing of] current benefits or, if not possible, the best achievable as a result of the … valuation’).

We have stated in previous consultations that we believe the current valuation was excessively prudent. It will be crucial to agree in negotiations what constitutes ‘moderate’ prudence. A suggestion would be to return towards the level of risk deemed acceptable in the 2017 valuation.

The ‘back-stop’ position proposed in point 3 commits employers to higher contribution rates whilst employee contributions remain unchanged. Even noting potential changes to benefits, this is not a realistic proposal and would call on UUK to negotiate with UCU to seek equal treatment to employer and employee contributions in this clause and bring total contributions as close as possible to current levels.

We support a pausing of industrial action whilst meaningful dialogue at national level takes place over the coming weeks on the issues above, noting the very tight timeframes involved.

We welcome this recognition from the University that UCU’s proposals were made in good faith as part of a genuine attempt to solve the dispute. Although we disagree with parts of the University’s approach, it is clear that if UUK adopted it then there would be a strong chance of a negotiated solution prior to industrial action. It is now crucial that the Vice Chancellor insists that his representatives do a better job of representing him than they have to date.

Industrial action

You will have received information from Jo Grady, UCU’s General Secretary, announcing that we will be taking industrial action from 14th February if the dispute is not resolved. Before that date USS Joint Negotiating Committee meetings are scheduled to take place on 1st and 11th February, so there is plenty of time for a negotiated solution to emerge. However, if UUK remains intransigent, UCU will consider the implementation of an assessment and marking boycott to follow strike action.

UUK’s cuts are due to be formally confirmed at a meeting on 22nd February, so it is vital that the industrial action – if it is needed – is solid. We must demonstrate that we are not willing to accept such dramatic and unjustified cuts to our pensions, and that we will not tolerate our employers telling us that they want an agreement, but only if that agreement matches their views.

Picket volunteers – as previously please get in touch with branch secretary Marc Gibson – who is again co-ordinating this activity: M.A.Gibson@lboro.ac.uk.

Four Fights

The Four Fights component of Industrial Action begins to run alongside the USS element as of Monday and Tuesday 21^st and 22^nd February.

Industrial action: Organising to Win

We are very pleased to acknowledge a generous donation to the UCU strike funds from our campus colleagues in Unite the Union – a very big thank you!!

Covid Update

The latest testing data shows that the University undertook 7,154 LFTs (figure includes staff and students), with 107 positive Covid cases diagnosed.

Whilst it is acknowledged that trends in infection rates and more serious complications look positive overall, LUCU remains acutely aware of how quickly the outlook might change. In this regard, LUCU commends the comparatively cautious approach taken by LU in its decision to retain its strategy of regular testing for staff and students on campuses, and for its continued support for hybrid working where practicable. LUCU will continue to closely co-operate with Unite and Unison in working with LU management to ensure that members are enabled to work in as safe a way as possible.

LUCU Committee

14th January 202214th January 2022

LUCU News: January 2022

Happy New Year!

Our first newsletter of 2022 covers the latest news on the USS Pension dispute, new guidelines for ASOS, and an update on COVID.

USS

USS are required by law to consult with members about any proposals to change benefits or contribution rates. The behaviour of USS during previous consultations does not give us confidence that they will take members’ views seriously, but nevertheless, we would encourage members to respond. If nothing else, it will create extra work for USS (who are required to summarise consultation responses) and allow UCU to correctly argue that we are accurately representing the views of USS members.

In previous years, suggested words have been offered by UCU negotiators. This led USS to weight many hundreds of responses as if they came from only one person, so we are not providing explicit suggested words this time. Instead, Sam Marsh, a UCU national negotiator, has produced a helpful twitter thread with ideas about what you could say in your consultation response.

Sam’s thread is available here, and we reproduce the key points here:

Firstly, here’s the consultation link. You will need your USS member number, which you can find on the top of emails from them, plus identifying information.

https://ussconsultation2021.co.uk/members

Once you’re logged in, you can play with the modeller and confirm that @UniversitiesUK are shameless about misrepresenting the scale of the cuts. (I am projected to lose ~36% of my future guaranteed pension, which falls to ~28% including DC converted to an annuity.)

Once you’ve figured out the impacts, then you can go to the questions. Here are some things you might like to consider saying at various points.

If you consider the cuts to be based on a distorted valuation, conducted at the worst point in the pandemic, say so!
If you believe the valuation suffers from extreme levels of prudence, then say so! (@MartinWolf_ of the @FT would probably agree.) https://t.co/BRNLi9GfFk
If you consider @USSPensions to have breached the scheme rules in how they conducted the valuation processes, biasing the negotiations away from @UCU and towards @UniversitiesUK, then say so!
If you consider the directors of the scheme to have acted contrary to your best interests, whether of the valuation date, the lack of control of scheme costs, the lack of divestment, or the equalities considerations of the proposed cuts, then say so! https://twitter.com/ewanmcg/status/1455889324390686726?s=20
If you are furious at the misrepresentation by @UniversitiesUK over the scale of the cuts, then say so!
If you are prepared to strike to ensure that the cuts are revoked, and a new valuation is demanded by employers, then say so!
Of course, if you believe that these cuts are a rational and necessary response to the situation the scheme’s in, then say that instead!

ONE IMPORTANT POINT TO ADD:

If you think that maintaining current benefits is the top priority (even if that means paying 11% from April-October while a new valuation is undertaken), say so! Employers are trying to pretend this option doesn’t exist.

This last point is particularly important. We would strongly encourage you to state, using your own words, that maintaining current benefits is your top priority.

ASOS

On December 21, 2021, UCU escalated Action Short of Strike. Members are asked not to reschedule any lectures or classes cancelled due to strike action. Lectures/classes are defined as any activity between a UCU member and a student or group of students which involves any instruction, tuition, communicating or sharing of knowledge, or guidance. In addition to timetabled lectures and seminars, this includes, for example, placement visits, Personal Best meetings, and dissertation supervisions. UCU will be issuing further guidance on ASOS shortly, and we will keep members updated as information becomes available.

COVID Update

LUCU continues to meet weekly with management to inform and monitor the University’s response to Covid. Our discussions, which involve also UNITE and Unison representatives, have been mainly productive, resulting in improvement to ventilation systems in work spaces across campus where required, while some teaching has been moved to more suitable rooms. We are pleased to inform members that the University will continue to run a testing programme using its store of Lateral Flow-test Devices (LFD’s), even if the government ceases testing. Regarding home working, we have been assured that where staff are not required to be on campus, they may continue to work from home. For staff who have concerns about in- person delivery or duties that require them to be on either campus, the University will continue its previous posture of providing a non-occupational health focussed solution via line management.

In reflection of the fluid broader national trend, cases at Loughborough University have been rising (see here for latest LU figures); hence, we are requesting additional mitigation measures: to make mask wearing mandatory and the provision of HEPA air filtration units where appropriate (noting this would incur a maintenance overhead).

LUCU Committee