Friday 1st May NEC Report

UCU’s NEC met for the final time in its 2025-2026 incarnation on 1st May 2026. The finalised minutes, which were agreed at the first meeting of the new NEC on 19th June, are now available.

Key takeaways

• Brutal funding cuts from the Ministry of Justice to the prison education workforce
• Changes to nomination process for equalities standing committees approved
• Motion committing UCU to action in support of Jewish communities carried
• Motion calling for UCU to donate to Good Law Project carried

Agenda items

GS Report

UCU is currently responding to the announcement of brutal funding cuts from the Ministry of Justice to prison education, which at around 300 staff amounts to roughly 10% of that workforce.

The Higher Education Committee had approved the censure of the University of Sheffield, after UCU members there were subjected to a lockout following a refusal to reschedule teaching lost to strike action over redundancies. 

UCU has reached agreement with the other Further Education trade unions (GMB, NEU, Unite and Unison) on this year's joint FE trade unions' pay claim (2026/27). The claim is built around the core demands of the new deal for FE campaign: FE pay parity with schoolteachers; national workload agreements sector level fully funded; and binding national bargaining.

There was a report back on the FE Parliamentary lobby, which was successful and follows previous lobbying successes securing increased funding for FE. There will also be a parliamentary meeting fringe at Congress, which will be chaired by Rachael Maskell MP. The GS encouraged all NEC members to attend.

Following the unsuccessful pay and conditions ballot in autumn 2025, the GS and the President-elect, Dyfrig Jones, have been visiting branches in all four UK nations as part of their strategy engagement exercise. The focus of this will be smaller branches, post-92 branches and those that are underrepresented at events such as Congress. There will be a report to HEC on the findings from the engagement exercise. There was constructive discussion about local campaigning, including against the far-right, and the importance of post-16 education providers in communities. 

It had been announced on 31st March that the union had been successful in defending itself against charges in two complaints to the Certification Officer, the trade union watchdog. One NEC member asked how much members’ money the union had had to spend defending itself (a six-figure sum, not including staff time) and whether any of this money was recoverable. NEC was told that it is not, because costs from CO complaints cannot be recovered.

Congress 2026

Implications of rule changes

This paper outlined to NEC the potential implications of three rule changes (R10, R11 and R12) that will be debated at Congress 2026. The Strategy and Finance Committee had recommended at its April meeting that NEC vote to make this information available to branches and Congress delegates. 

R10: While UCU is not a public authority and therefore not bound by the Freedom of Information Act, if implemented, this rule change would compel UCU to act as though it were. According to the advice given to NEC, these obligations could prove onerous for UCU, and if implemented this change would make UCU an outlier relative to other unions. 

R11: this rule change would mean that a quorum of 20 branches could launch an investigation into the conduct of the GS. The NEC was advised that this could not be made to apply during an incumbent GS term, as the GS is elected but also an employee, and therefore benefits from employment rights. UCU has some very small branches (there are 70 with fewer than 20 members), meaning that this rule change could enable an extremely small proportion of the membership to instigate an investigation into the GS: who, after all, is elected in a ballot of 113,000 members. 

R12: the stated purpose of this rule change was to “ensure accountability and transparency for decisions that will affect assistance to members who lose pay following industrial action.” NEC was advised that it risks pushing decisions on the fighting fund back to NEC, which could significantly slow response times as NEC has over 60 members and meets relatively infrequently. The major concern here is whether this could result in reduced responsiveness to branch requests for funds. 

UCU Commoner and women’s rep Jo Edge argued that in the spirit of transparency, it is important that this information is available to Congress delegates and respect the expertise of our head of democratic services. NEC made a decision to ringfence fighting fund money to FE, and it is something that we do. Another NEC member (HT Andrew Feeney) pointed out that if officers had to wait for NEC every time they wanted to authorise from the fighting fund, members would be waiting months and that this would be a highly inefficient way in which to operate. 

The outcome of the vote on whether to share the advice from the Head of Democratic Services with Congress delegates was 35 votes in favour, 5 against, and 7 abstentions. 

Implications of Congress motions

UCU’s Head of Equality and Policy proposed wording for an amendment that would, at the very least, clarify that motion SFC27 relates to far-right groups using Zionism to pressure students. This makes the motion specific to the education sector, thus ensuring compliance with relevant laws and protecting the union from potential legal challenges.

Many NEC members spoke in favour of this amendment, underscoring the importance of making the motion as watertight as possible and of ensuring that we are within our own rules that require opposition to all forms of discrimination. For UCU Commons NEC members, the crucial point was that it is actions, not beliefs, that trigger legal consequences; meaning that the union must at all costs avoid appearing to target people for their beliefs. We shared a fundamental objection to the motion as a whole, but agreed that since it will be challenged at Congress in any case, having these amendments included will help with the challenges. We have also been contacted by Jewish members with concerns about the potential consequences of this motion.

Others favoured inserting ‘far-right’ but not the other parts of the amendment. One member proposed taking the amendment in parts to facilitate this. This proposal fell (17 in favour, 28 against), so the committee voted on accepting the amendment as a whole, which carried (28 in favour, 16 against and 1 abstention).

Equality standing orders rule change

In her last NEC meeting after six years as a member, Jo E did a great speech on the equality standing orders rule change. Other members spoke in favour of this rule change, saying it was long overdue, and the rule change carried very comfortably (46 in favour, 2 against, and zero abstentions). This change will now be brought to the next meeting of the Anticasualisation Committee for its consideration on 8th July.

Draft calendar of meetings

This calendar was presented to NEC for information only, as the decision is for the new NEC at the June meeting. Drawing up the calendar of meetings is an extremely difficult job and some clashes are, unfortunately, unavoidable. 

Motions from members

Following the horrifying antisemitic attack in Golders Green on 29th April, UCU Commoners Mark Pendleton and Bijan Parsia brought an emergency motion calling for UCU to support Jewish communities in resisting and combating antisemitism. Happily, this motion carried overwhelmingly, with only two votes against. 

HE LGBTQ+ members rep Tilly Fitzmaurice and women’s rep Jo Edge brought a motion calling for UCU to donate a suggested sum of £1000 to the Good Law Project. Following the Supreme Court’s ruling on For Women Scotland vs. Scottish Ministers in April 2025, the GLP has been challenging the resulting EHRC guidance in court. UCU’s donation would be directed to supporting the GLP’s legal campaign on trans rights. Happily, after a brief clarification on this campaign’s status as a ‘crowdfunder’, this motion carried almost unanimously.