Liverpool UCU votes for strike ballot

Staff at the University of Liverpool will ballot for strike action over plans to alter employees’ terms and conditions.

June 19, 2013

Liverpool

Members of University and College Union’s Liverpool branch voted on 19 June in favour of a ballot on industrial action over moves they believe will force about 2,800 non-academic staff to accept revised terms and conditions.

A “yes” vote in the ballot could trigger an escalating programme of strike action and action short of a strike, such as refusing to work unpaid overtime, this autumn.

The vote follows anger at a letter to staff, which said they must accept new contracts or face three months’ notice of dismissal – with the carrot of being rehired on the new terms.

Unions claim the revised contracts would increase staff working at weekends, evenings and bank holidays without the appropriate time off in lieu.

Union officials have also criticised Liverpool for breaking its own redundancy protocols.

The university announced it is serving notice to staff of a 45-day consultation period, which came into effect in April, as opposed to a 90-day consultation period previously agreed with unions.

UCU regional official Martyn Moss, said: “It’s no surprise that staff voted unanimously to be balloted for strike action. 

“We don’t know of any other university that has attacked its staff’s terms and conditions in such a deplorable way.

“The threat to dismiss more than half the staff risks doing serious damage to the good reputation of the University of Liverpool.

“Ripping up the protocols we have agreed with the university and slashing the consultation period will do nothing to improve the morale of staff.

“Unless the university withdraws the redundancy notice and agrees to sit down with us to try and resolve this, strike action early in the autumn term looks a very real possibility.”

A university spokesman has said the changes will help to “standardise the terms and conditions for the university’s non-academic and academic-related staff”.

The changes would “provide greater consistency and transparency about the circumstances in which staff become eligible for certain terms such as pay supplements or compensatory time off”, he added.

“The university will not be making any compulsory redundancies as a result of the new contracts.”

jack.grove@tsleducation.com

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Reader's comments (3)

Non-academic staff think that they can still limit their working hours to 9 to 5 while academics are pretty much on call 24/7.
Perhaps non-academic staff would have a similar response if academics' leave entitlement (admittedly often not taken, or taken to do research) was cut down to non-academic staff levels.
Can I assume that beacuse UCU are involved, that this relates to the old style category of 'academic related' staff? The divide between 'academic related' and other staff always seemed a throw-back and created an artifical divide through the university. If that is what Liverpool are tackling; then that's probably a good thing. If they're just making a lot of people's terms & conditions worse for the sake of flexibility (etc) than that's a bad thing.

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

PhD Scholar in Medicine

University Of Queensland

Manager, Research Systems and Performance

Auckland University Of Technology

Lecturer in Aboriginal Allied Health

University Of South Australia

Lecturer, School of Nursing & Midwifery

Western Sydney University

College General Manager, SHE

La Trobe University
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham