UCU Congress 2024 - a member's report
Several hundred delegates from branches across the four nations and from higher, further, prison and adult and community education, met in Bournemouth last week for UCU’s annual Congress – the peak policy-making body of our union. UCU Commons members were also active over the last week, representing branches, regional committees and our equality standing committees. Below is a report from outgoing vice-chair of the higher education committee from pre-92 universities Mark Pendleton (The University of Sheffield), who continues for one more year on the NEC.
As with all Commons reports, the below reflects one member’s views, which aren’t necessarily shared by all Commons members – UCU Commons is a pluralistic group of left activists in the union, who organise in our union around a set of key values.
Addressing Institutional Racism
This year’s Congress was marked by several key debates and an unprecedented strike by Unite members of UCU staff, which resulted in the cancellation of the higher education and further education sector conferences on the second day. UCU Commons members attended fringe meetings, pickets and the strike day rally to understand better the issues that have led Unite members to take this action and to express our solidarity with striking workers. Our union clearly has a serious, longstanding and unaddressed issue with institutional racism, and while we wish that taking industrial action were not necessary, we thank Unite UCU and particularly its Black members, for raising this issue to the prominence it deserves and promise to work with you to ensure that this is addressed, and urgently.
In this context, we were pleased to hear the general secretary Jo Grady announce on the final day of Congress that agreement had been reached to conduct a review led by an external panel and under terms agreed with Unite. This review is due to take place over the summer and must result in meaningful change, again urgently. Outcomes and recommendations are due to be released to all branches in the interests of transparency and UCU Commons members serving on the National Executive Committee will ensure that promise is upheld by the union’s management and that recommendations of this review are enacted.
There were also several related debates at Congress that touched on the Unite dispute and on the wider issue of institutional racism in the union. While we all welcomed the urgent focus on this important issue, and supported most of these motions, some Commons members were uncomfortable with some elements, in particular one line that requested the disbandment of investigation processes into the conduct of some Black members of staff.
As the incoming vice-president of the union, David Hunter, argued in the debate, for Congress to vote to support calls like this, with no context about issues that are understandably confidential and beyond the remit of Congress, risks interfering in due process, and may impact on the rights of any complainants, should any such people exist. Without any real context as to the nature of any investigations, there is also a risk that aspersions are cast unfairly on other Black members of staff. Many of us in Commons know as experienced caseworkers and branch reps that real damage can be caused by not following fair investigative or disciplinary processes and, if there are complainants or survivors involved, by not treating their concerns seriously. We would not and could not support that from our employers and should not tolerate that in our union. Congress delegates do not and should not know the context of any investigation into staff conduct and as such should not have chosen to intervene in sensitive internal processes in such a way.
We understand that the Unite UCU dispute covers a few other areas where agreement is yet to be reached with UCU management, but as a group we urge UCU’s senior management team and Unite UCU’s branch committee to continue to seek resolution of this dispute urgently in the interests of all UCU staff and the wider membership.
“Recalling” sector conferences
One day of the annual Congress is usually given over to discussion of issues facing the two sections of our union – higher education (which accounts for about 2/3 of members and delegates) and further education (which covers the balance, including prison education and adult and community education). These conferences allow sector-specific issues to be discussed by those affected, which includes things like industrial strategy.
The loss of our sector conferences to the strike action was also a matter of some discussion. As vice-chair of HEC, I worked urgently over the first day of the Congress with the other higher education officers to expedite a HEC meeting shortly after the conclusion of this Congress to consider how to proceed under our rules, likely through the calling of a special sector conference. Despite reassurances that this was in train, and advice by Congress Business Committee not to act outside the union’s rules, Congress delegates chose to pass a motion to “recall” sector conferences and also passed rule changes mandating future “recall” conferences. These changes were drafted in less than 24 hours and had not been consulted on with relevant UCU staff with expertise in rules and processes, or with any members or branches.
“Recalling” conferences is not within Congress’s powers and conflicts with the longstanding convention in our union that HE members cannot speak or act for FE members in sectoral issues, and vice versa. Given the much higher proportion of Congress delegates representing HE branches, the demonstrated disregard for the rights of FE delegates sets a dangerous precedent, and reinforces some of the longstanding critiques made by FE colleagues, who sometimes feel that their views and priorities play second fiddle to those of HE within our union. Acting in this way was also just unnecessary, given that mechanisms already exist, and were in the process of being put in place, to bring the lost business to a meeting in the near future.
This was symptomatic of a wider problem this year, in which almost every single decision of the Congress Business Committee – an elected body charged with the ordering of our business in line with our rules and the law – was overturned by Congress floor. I worry that this Congress played so fast and loose with the rules that we are in serious danger of being subject to legal challenge over our decisions.
I also think we should in general be much more careful about changing rules that bind our union in the future – at the very least, members of staff with expertise in rules and processes should have been afforded the respect to be heard on any impacts of such a rule change, as would have been common if such rule changes were submitted in the normal way in advance, and branches should have been consulted. In rushing to pass these hastily drafted changes, many Congress delegates acted beyond the scope of their authority as they had no knowledge of or capacity to find out their branch’s position. This raises serious concerns about the delegated and branch-led democracy we claim to uphold at Congress.
Enabling Future Hybrid Meetings
In a more positive development, Congress passed landmark changes to our rules to provide for future Congresses to be held in hybrid online/in-person form. This set of rule changes was moved by Commons member and Midlands NEC rep Caroline Proctor (Warwick University), who used her own expertise as an IT specialist working in professional services to point to the advancements in technology to allow for hybrid meetings, the near decade use of these technologies in our sibling unions and the importance of hybrid options to foster greater inclusivity and accessibility, for example for those with caring responsibilities or certain disabilities, as well as potentially reducing our carbon footprint. The urgency of enabling hybrid was brought home for us in Commons by the absence of our member and NEC Disabled Members Rep Bijan Parsia, who at the last minute was prevented from traveling to Bournemouth because of Covid. Parsia prepared a speech that was eloquently read by his fellow Disabled Members Rep Pat Roche, noting in particular that “Access is critical…[and that] widening access benefits more than just disabled members.”
Other delegates also stressed that hybrid cannot come at the cost of reducing disabled members’ access to in person meetings, which must be maintained. This move should instead increase accessibility and provide members – whether disabled or not – the flexibility to fully participate in Congress in a mode of their choosing.
We were pleased that nearly all delegates supported the move to hybrid meetings, and we look forward to future Congresses being offered in a mixed online and in person mode, providing the greatest opportunity for maximum participation in the democracy of our union.
Active International Solidarity
Another highlight of this year’s Congress was the address by the Palestinian Ambassador to the UK, Husam Zomlot, who stressed the centrality of education to the Palestinian people’s long struggle for justice, and thanked UCU for our unwavering solidarity with the Palestinian people. General Secretary Jo Grady also announced plans for UCU branches to twin with Palestinian universities that have been destroyed by the Israeli bombardment of Gaza as they rebuild, which was met with enthusiastic support.
Palestine solidarity was a key theme of the wider international debates at Congress, with motions supporting student encampments at UK universities and condemning our employers’ complicity in resourcing the arms companies that are facilitating the genocide in Gaza. Some delegates also provided important reminders of the need to remember the human cost both on October 7 and in the months thereafter – many of our members have loved ones in both Israel and Gaza – while reaffirming our solidarity with Palestine and deep condemnation of Israel’s actions. We also debated motions to develop active solidarity with those under attack in other parts of the world – including Argentina, under right-wing leader Milei – through active engagement with activists fighting repressive regimes and supporting them to come to the UK.
Solidarity with Ukraine was also discussed, with a complex debate over a motion causing some disagreements, despite a powerful moving speech from a delegate with direct connections to Ukraine. Ultimately the motion ended up with a somewhat contradictory position – removing references to supporting the provision of military aid to Ukraine and adding in a call for an immediate ceasefire. Some expressed concern over this call, as it could result in the current occupation by Russia of significant areas of Ukraine continuing unaddressed. The motion also retained support for our sibling unions in Ukraine, who have argued for precisely the things that were removed - one Commons member Sophia Woodman from Edinburgh noted the importance of that longstanding principle of solidarity with marginalised groups, “Nothing about us without us”, in arguing that we needed to take our lead from our sibling unions on the ground. Moves by some members of UCU Left to remove references to those sibling unions and to prevent affiliation with the Ukraine Solidarity Campaign were fortunately not successful and affiliation was passed, which we welcome. To highlight the real struggles many delegates were facing in deciding how to vote on this heavily amended motion, however, I ended up voting against the final wording because I could not support the addition of the call for an immediate ceasefire despite supporting many other aspects of the final text.
General Election
Several emergency motions made it onto the agenda and were passed, including calling for the restoration of UCU member Faiza Shaheen as a Labour candidate, support for other left members of Labour who have been denied endorsement, and a motion that binds UCU to a position that is highly critical of the Office for Students and its function as a regulator that is not interested in maintaining standards and ensuring quality education in the post-16 sector, but instead operates as an increasingly interventionist right-wing attack dog.
Budgets and Finances
As is usual, Congress heard and passed our annual budget and subscription rates for the coming year. What was a little more unusual this year, however, was that the Honorary Treasurer David Harvie did not move these elements. Harvie spoke to Congress to raise concerns about how budget setting has worked in the union, the need for greater transparency around finances for branches and members, and his desire for faster movement on progressive reform of subscription rates and additional budgetary items where changes could be made to better align with our values as a union, for example in addressing our carbon impact. Harvie also noted the work of incoming President Maxine Looby in facilitating discussion between him and senior members of UCU staff to resolve differences. I look forward to his report next year, where I hope that we will hear reports of substantial progress being made.
Business Unheard
Unfortunately, as with any Congress, we simply were unable to get through all the business. This was disappointing as several motions written by Commons members were not taken for debate, as well as other important areas brought by other members and branches.
These include a motion highlighting the severe methodological flaws of the recent Cass review, which excluded vast amounts of scholarly evidence and selectively interpreted others in order to achieve its aims of undermining the rights of trans and non-binary people. This motion was drafted by Commons member Matilda Fitzmaurice (Lancaster) and passed through both the LGBT+ committee and women’s committee, which is chaired by Jo Edge (Edinburgh).
Thank you and next steps
Congress marks the annual turning point in the composition of our National Executive, National Officers and all subsidiarity committees. This year we are saying goodbye to four excellent Commons NEC members, who have gone above and beyond to represent members to the best of their abilities. We know this is not the end of their activity in the union and look forward to their continued work at branch level and beyond. But for now, a huge thanks to Laura Chuhan Campbell (Durham), Emma Kennedy (Greenwich), Emma Rees (Chester), and Esther Murray (QMUL) – your knowledge, expertise, enthusiasm and camaraderie will all be deeply missed.
Six members of UCU Commons continue on the NEC for 2024-25 – Jo Edge (Edinburgh, representative of women members), Matilda Fitzmaurice (Lancaster, representative of casualised members), Bijan Parsia (Manchester, representative of disabled members), Caroline Proctor (Warwick, Midlands rep), Vivek Thuppil (Bangor, representative of migrant members) and myself (Sheffield, representative of LGBT+ members). As always, we are contactable via the NEC contact form on the UCU website – please do reach out if you have any questions or would like to let us know the views of your branches and fellow members.
Elections to various other national roles – including UK-wide negotiators on pay and pensions, Congress Business Committee and the Conduct of Members Committee – have also taken place recently. While we are yet to receive the outcomes of those votes, several Commons members put themselves forward and all look forward to serving members if elected. We’ll update this list further once outcomes of those elections are announced.
This Congress was also the first since the re-election of the General Secretary Jo Grady, who Commons endorsed and for whom many Commons members campaigned. Unfortunately her re-election was barely noted at Congress. While there are no doubt many lessons to be learned from her first term, Grady was the only candidate in the election willing to address past mistakes head on and also presented an agenda for change that our union so desperately needs, and which members endorsed.
Our members need and deserve a forward-looking union that can confront the multiple challenges our workplaces and societies face over the next five years. So in closing, I hope that those who supported different candidates or platforms are now willing to stop the ad hominem attacks, petty sniping and bullying of those they disagree with. That behaviour was all too characteristic of this year’s election and recent years of “debate” in UCU. Some of us in Commons may have also at times overstepped such lines. But we can’t keep fighting amongst ourselves. Commons members are working in our branches and networks to deliver a union that can transform post-16 education and we know many others are too, whether in different groupings or none. We look forward to working together to achieve that. As Judith Butler noted in the introduction to their recent book Who’s Afraid of Gender?: “Coalitions do not require mutual love; they require only a shared insight that oppressive forces can be defeated by acting together and moving forward with difficult differences without insisting on their ultimate resolution.” As a coalition of workers across post-16 education, we will never resolve all our political differences but we can and must figure out how to move forward together.