Report from NEC, Friday 7th November 2025

Key Takeaways

• Congress 2026 will be hybrid
• NEC have moved to support the restoration of Trade Union Education
• NEC have voted for a campaign in support of Laura Murphy and Academic Freedom

Full Report

Pension Discussion

The committee meeting opened with a report of concerns discussed at the Retired Members meeting taking place the previous day. This centred around the poor administration of TPS, currently managed by Capita. Capita are due to be replaced by TATA soon, which may or may not give the reader cause for hope of an improvement. The Honorary Treasurer reported attempts in Northumbria to encourage staff to switch from TPS to USS that deserve scrutiny and caution. Of particular concern was a cash payment to encourage staff to switch and the assertion that those remaining on TPS will receive no pay rises. More information on that can be found on the UCU website.

General Secretary’s Report

Jo Grady reported on her manifold activities in lobbying the Government, employers and work on multiple campaigns. UCU is engaged in multiple ballots at the moment and there can be no doubt that the General Secretary is putting the work in. Grady received several questions from the floor. The two most pertinent issues to arise were around academic freedom and the Laura Murphy case, which will be discussed in more detail below, and efforts in lobbying the Government to recognise the importance of our sectors. In responses, Grady highlighted in particular the importance of prison educators and that a large number of Labour MPs are interested in joining a group to help lobby on behalf of both FE and HE.

Hybrid Congress

NEC voted for the 2026 Congress to be hybrid. It was a pleasure to vote for this, and there was a large majority in support (For: 38; Against: 12; Abstain: 2). The official report on the previous year’s hybrid congress informed us that, despite technical teething pains, the format had been well received and in particular the method of voting. This question of voting was the real cause of dissension. While one member spuriously argued that hybrid was ‘bad for neurodivergent people’, Commons member Jo Edge rightly pointed out that neurodivergence is, by definition, different for each individual, and so individuals shouldn’t try to speak for everyone. Although, she remarked that her experience was markedly less stressful even though she attended the hybrid conference in person. The previous practice had been to hold up cards in full view of everyone. Hybrid Congress made this an inelegant solution, and so anonymous electronic voting was chosen instead. Many committee members reported that this resulted in business passing with much greater facility and speed. The opposition argued that anonymous voting led to decreased accountability, which as an argument in isolation is not without merit. However, it was convincingly opposed by two strands of response. First, that the only people that delegates are accountable to are their branches, who are not present to witness the vote. Second, that what was really meant by “accountability” was really a smokescreen for “susceptibility to intimidation”. Multiple members reported witnesses and being victim to bullying during votes as individuals from certain factions would act like party whips and target those voting against their wishes. One member opposing the motion did claim that they witnessed greater bullying in the hybrid model, although this was not a claim repeated by anyone else. Bullying is an extremely serious issue and I’d advise any member experiencing it to avail themselves of the support available through your union. You can also review the complaints procedure for misconduct occurring within the union on UCU's website.

Emergency Motions RE Academic Freedom and Laura Murphy

Two emergency motions (Late Motions 1 & 2) were brought in response to the news that Laura Murphy of Sheffield Hallam was subject to political interference into her research on supply chains and forced labour in China. Both motions passed (LM1: 49/0/3; LM2: 52/0/0) and took slightly different approaches. LM1 resolved to:

• campaign for a full public enquiry into the events at SHU
• campaign for changes to the broken funding model which is leading universities to prioritise income over academic freedom
  LM2 requested the GS to:
• ask branches to gather and pass up information about any similar issues at their institutions, for example by making FOI requests; and
• contact the Office for Students to press them to investigate PRC [People’s Republic of China] and other government attempts to suppress academic freedom and free speech, using their powers under the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act 2023
  

There was no debate held as no one wished to speak in opposition. The NEC was united in its support for these actions.

Trade Union Education Motion

The first of the two ordinary motions that received a debate and vote concerned the diminishing of trade union education, covering training for trade unionists in multiple areas including domestic abuse, menopause, cancer and the far right. However, many trade union education units have been closing, diminishing access to these services. The motion called on UCU to lobby the TUC, UK Government and devolved authorities to:

• Restore TU Ed funding, increasing learner rates and re–introducing the Union Learning Fund for enough tutors to be trained
• Make funding available to all TUC–affiliated union reps, regardless of home postcode

And further, it called on UCU to:

• Co–ordinate regular meetings of TU Ed units to share good practice and discuss issues and solutions.

As there was no opposition, the motion moved straight to vote passed near–unanimously (51/1/0).

Demonstration against austerity

Motion 2 called for a demonstration against austerity in alignment with a Congress motion to ‘organise a “UK–wide demonstration to oppose the government’s cuts strategy” and specifically called for the GS to “propose at the next TUC general council that a date be named for a TUC organised weekend anti–austerity demonstration”. This motion also went to vote without debate, passing (37/6/4).

Motions out of order

An optimistic eleven motions were submitted to NEC by members, and that doesn’t count the two emergency motions discussed above. Alas, various delays, not least a late start, meant that most of these did not see the light of day. At the risk of entering a parallel universe in which NEC did run for another two hours, however, it is worth mentioning that several of these motions were ruled out of order or remitted in various ways. Three motions were redirected to correspondence and one was ruled untimely since it was asking for the results of a survey to be distributed, but said survey had not yet taken place. Most disappointing was Motion 11, which concerned the trade dispute between Unite and UCU. We were told ‘elements’ had been ‘ruled out of order’ by the chair, but not specifically which ones. Indeed, looking at the motion I’m not clear which elements would remain in order. It’s not within our powers or responsibilities to rule on staffing disputes, and doing so would place the chair, who has responsibilities pertaining to the dispute, in an impossible situation. Our position comes with responsibilities, one of which is to stick within the rules. It’s disappointing that experienced committee members struggle with that. More information on the Unite UCU dispute can be found on UCU's website. Everyone at UCU Commons hopes an amicable resolution can be found soon.