Rule Change to Equality Standing Committee Nomination Process

With the help and advice of UCU staff, UCU Commons members have proposed a rule change for the equality standing committee nomination process. The goal of this is to make the process of nominating to these advisory committees easier and less administratively burdensome for members, branches and branch administrators, as well as protecting the privacy of members with protected characteristics.

We envisage that if agreed and implemented, this rule change will provide the following benefits:

• Widen member participation in the work of equalities standing committees (ESCs)
• Reduce the need to run co-option processes, which are less democratic and add to the workload of UCU officials
• Bring the nomination process for ESCs into line with that of the National Executive Committee (NEC)
• Mitigate the burden for members disproportionately affected by the branch nomination requirement, such as casualised members.

There are also more fundamental issues that we believe this rule change can address. We believe that no member of a marginalised group (whether a Black, disabled or LGBT+ person, a woman or a migrant) should be in a position to have to ask permission from a branch committee, which is potentially majority white, male, straight, cis or non-disabled, to represent their own group on a union committee. Neither should the branch committee have the power to block a potentially multiply marginalised member from representing the groups with which they identify. We consider that this, along with the principle that no-one should have to disclose a protected characteristic in order to secure a branch nomination, can work to strengthen UCU’s firm commitment to a policy of self-ID.

This motion will be debated and voted on at the meetings of the equalities standing committees (Women’s, Black members, Disabled members, Migrant members and LGBT+ members) in January 2026. If carried by all (or a majority of) these advisory committees, the motion will be brought to the Equality Committee for comment before it goes before the National Executive Committee, where it will need a simple majority to pass.

The text of the proposed motion can be found below. 

Motion: Rule Change to Equality Standing Committee Nomination Process

Committee notes:

1. The nomination process to Equality Standing Committees (ESCs) requiring a branch nomination only.
2. The lack of nominations to ESCs every year, with co-options frequently taking place.
3. The relative lack of representation of FE, ACE, Prison Education, post-92, ARPS and casualised members on ESCs.
4. The nomination process to NEC positions requiring 10 signatures or a branch nomination.

Committee believes:

1. It should not be harder to nominate to an advisory ESC than to a decision-making NEC.
2. The requirement of a branch nomination discourages nominations, disadvantages casualised members who move between branches, and creates unnecessary bureaucracy for branch administrators.
3. Nobody should have to reveal protected characteristics to get a branch nomination.

Committee resolves:

1. To instruct NEC to amend the standing orders for the nomination process to ESCs, which should be brought in line with those for NEC. 

Terminology jargon-buster:

• FE - Further Education
• ACE - Adult and Community Education
• ARPS - Academic-Related and Professional Services