Wednesday 11th February Special HEC Report
Headlines
- HEC voted to ask for RPI+3%, or £3,000 on all pay points (whichever highest)
- HEC approved the continuation of joint working groups on casualisation, workload and pay inequalities
- HEC approved the inclusion of joint work on ARPS career pathways
- UCU Left elected negotiators appeared to sabotage their own report
Background
This meeting of the HEC was called for the purpose of discussing the 2026/2027 New JNCHES pay claim. Since this was a special meeting, it only had one item of business and members could not submit motions or papers for debate. HEC members received two papers in advance of the meeting: a report by the Committee Secretary (UCU’s Head of Higher Education) and the report agreed by the elected negotiators.
The Committee Secretary’s report presented details of the claim’s pay element, while also summarising the positions of the four other New JNCHES unions (Unite, Unison, GMB and EIS). After the debate had concluded, the committee would vote on which option it preferred. The two options, which reflect the asks made by the other unions, were as follows:
Option 1: A pay uplift of RPI+3% or £3,000 on all pay points, whichever is higher
Option 2: A pay uplift of RPI+5.7% or £3,000 on all pay points, whichever is higher
HEC was also asked to vote on the following:
- The positions on the pay-related elements set out in the negotiators’ report
- The inclusion of an ask agreed with the ARPS committee (academic-related and professional services) relating to joint work on career pathways for ARPS colleagues.
Pay element
The negotiators’ report stated that pay discussions had to reflect HESC policy as well as members’ concerns about pay asks being deferred, or, if implemented, potentially worsening the already precarious financial situation faced by many HEIs. UCU Left and aligned members of HEC were arguing for Option 2, which it was highly unlikely employers would agree to.
The Committee Secretary’s report presented details of the claim’s pay element, while also summarising the positions of the four other New JNCHES unions. After the debate had concluded, the committee was asked to vote on which option it preferred.
The Committee Secretary had agreed to accept certain minor amendments (changes to the pay figure) to her report from the floor, but members had been told in no uncertain terms that the negotiators’ report could not be amended in the same fashion.
There were many helpful speeches from HEC members in the debate. These included requests that HEC consider the diversity of institutions and their financial situations, as well as a plea by UCU Commons member Bijan Parsia for our asks to be as progressive as possible to provide maximum benefit for our lowest-paid members. Parsia also proposed tiered flat rates to lower the total cost of the proposal and make it more steeply progressive, with the idea of allowing for an option that might help the lowest paid. While initially accepted, Parsia would later withdraw this amendment for ease and consistency.
Pay-related elements
These useful contributions were, however, overshadowed by the apparent insistence by UCU Left negotiators on sabotaging their own report. The chair of HEC, President-elect Dyfrig Jones, had to restate multiple times that the negotiators’ report was not up for amendment, and that the negotiators had had ample opportunity to feed into the report, but in some cases had not attended necessary meetings. This led to UCU Left members baselessly accusing Jones of personal attacks on negotiators, and one UCU Left HEC member swore in response to Jones telling them this. As a result, they were removed from the meeting.
Among the pay-related elements, a point of contention was the unions’ demand for a UK-wide moratorium on redundancies. However, the negotiators had reported that UCEA was unlikely to agree to such a moratorium, and that including it in the claim could constitute a barrier to further progress with negotiations. Nonetheless, UCU Left and aligned members in the meeting repeatedly demanded that the negotiators’ report be amended to include the demand for a moratorium.
The claim instead focused on the following three points:
- Ensuring that all UCEA members adopt and adhere to redundancy avoidance policies already agreed by the joint trade unions
- Agreeing joint lobbying of the UK government on HE funding reform between UCEA and the New JNCHES unions
- Agreeing joint work to implement policy on the non-renewal of fixed-term contracts during redundancy situations, to address the ‘hidden redundancy’ crisis impacting casualised staff.
On casualisation, workload and inequalities, the negotiators recommended that the New JNCHES unions should demand that the working groups continue, and that UCU should take an active role in this work. They further recommended that the aim of this work should be to agree principles that can be developed, within a clearly defined timescale, into enforceable national agreements.
One UCU-Left aligned member of the committee made a challenge to the chair, arguing that minor amendments should be accepted from the floor on pay-related elements. However, this challenge was lost: 12 votes for, 15 against, zero abstentions.
Votes
One HEC member had proposed the following: that we express our preference for a flat £3,000/year increase (as proposed by Unison). If this were to pass, Options 1 and 2 (outlined above) would fall.
The vote on this was tied (13 votes for, and 13 against), which meant it fell as there was no status quo ante.
HEC members were then asked to vote between options 1 and 2. Option 1 (3%) received 15 votes, while Option 2 (5.7%) received 12 votes, with zero abstentions.
As a result, Option 1 carried.
The next vote was on whether to accept the negotiators’ report. The committee voted to accept it: with 19 votes in favour, 9 votes against, and zero abstentions.
The final vote was on the ARPS career pathway, as outlined above. The committee voted to accept this: with 28 votes in favour, zero against, and zero abstentions.