Rule Change to Anti-Casualisation Committee Nomination Process

Jo Edge, co-chair of UCU's Anti-Casualisation Committee (ACC) is bringing the following paper and motion for discussion and decision to the meeting of the committee on 8 July 2026.

Explanatory paper

This paper provides background and rationale for the motion to amend the nomination process to the Anti-Casualisation Committee (ACC). 

1. ACC Standing Orders point 1.6 only provides for nominations by branches or local associations and mandates that 'nominations submitted by branches/local associations must have been approved either by a quorate branch meeting, or by a properly constituted meeting of staff on casual contracts, or by a quorate branch committee meeting. The secretary of the branch/local association will confirm that nominations submitted have received such approval’.
2. UCU elections rule 5c (in Schedule A to the union’s rules) states that the nomination process to NEC is: 'either (i) the identifiable signatures of ten members of the Union who are entitled to vote in any ballot held to fill that position, not more than five of whom may be from the same branch/local association, or (ii) a statement signed by the Presiding Officer or Honorary Secretary of a local association or branch that the nomination has been adopted by a resolution at a quorate general meeting of that branch/local association’.
3. Therefore, our decision-making NEC has more pathways to nomination than our advisory ACC.
4. The last contested election to ACC from the HE sector was in 2022 where four members nominated to three positions. Three members nominated in 2023 and from 2023­–26, fewer than three HE members nominated. Committee does not recall a contested election in FE over the last few years. So, there are almost never enough nominations to the ACC, and when this happens, attendees of the annual meeting are invited to self-nominate to co-opt for a period of one year. If not enough members of the annual meeting nominate, the call is extended to the membership as a whole. A decision on whom to co-opt is taken by the ACC alone. This takes up ACC's time both during and outside of meetings that could be spent on ACC business.
5. Furthermore, the requirement for a branch nomination to be voted on by the branch membership, branch committee or a meeting of staff on casual contracts is burdensome and takes up time during branch meetings, makes work for officers and staff, and adds layers of unnecessary bureaucracy.
6. The nature of the HE and FE sectors mean that many casualised members do not have branches when the call for nominations is issued, or are not known well enough to branches or committees to gain a nomination. In fact, casualised members should not have to ask a committee or meeting's permission to stand for election to do anti-casualisation work. This is even more problematic when you factor in racialised, gender, class, disability and LGBTQ+ identities. Having some agency over whom you ask to nominate you is, therefore, welcome.
7. In May 2026, NEC approved a similar rule change requested by four of our five advisory Equality Standing Committees and the Equality Committee and allowed both of these pathways for nominations to the Equality Standing Committees.
8. Should ACC pass this motion, a paper on this basis will be presented to the NEC for ratification, where it would require a simple majority to pass. The rules would then be changed to allow both nomination pathways for election to ACC.
9. The limit of two ACC members per branch to be elected at each annual meeting (unless the election is uncontested) would replace the de facto limit of one member per branch imposed by the current nomination process and seeks to balance the desire to ensure that in future as many members of the committee as possible are elected by the annual meeting and the need for the committee to represent as wide as possible a range of casualised members’ experiences.
10. In future ACC may wish to consider lowering the number of signatures needed, or relaxing the per-branch limit, depending on whether the number of nominations increases due to this change.

Motion

Committee notes:

1. The current nomination process for election to the Anti-Casualisation Committee (ACC) requiring a branch nomination. Each branch may nominate only one member.
2. The lack of nominations for election at the annual meeting in recent years, with one-year co-options frequently taking place.
3. The nomination process to NEC positions requiring EITHER ten signatures of members (with no more than five from the same branch) OR a branch nomination.

 Committee believes:

1. There should not be fewer methods of nomination for election to the advisory ACC than to the decision-making NEC.
2. The requirement for a branch nomination discourages nominations, disadvantages casualised members who move between branches, and is burdensome for branch officers and administrators.
3. The co-option process is burdensome and time-consuming for ACC members and UCU staff alike.

 Committee resolves to request that the NEC amends the ACC standing orders to:

1. Require EITHER a branch nomination OR ten signatures of any members from at least two branches in the relevant sector (HE or FE) for any member to nominate. If contested, a ballot will be conducted of attendees at the annual meeting of staff on casual contracts.
2. Mandate that no more than two members from any one branch may be elected at each annual meeting, unless the election in the relevant sector is uncontested.