Skip to main content

Day: 9 February 2018

UCU strike sparks student outrage

Manchester University students are demanding refunds for the possible cancellation of three weeks’ worth of classes, when teaching staff are going on strike.

The Universities and Colleges Union (UCU) are planning to take strike action starting on Thursday the 22nd of February through to Friday the 16th of March, across 61 universities.

The UCU voted to take strike action on Monday the 22nd of January after talks with Universities UK (UUK) over the future of staff pensions ended without an agreement. An open letter authored by University of Manchester students states: “we demand that the University negotiate with the UCU and staff on strike, or pay each student a full refund for the contact time missed.”

The open letter claims if the strikes go ahead, the lost contact time for home students will be worth approximately £1200 in paid tuition and up to £2000 for international students.

The letter, written by student representatives for the English Literature course, has gained 316 signatures in 24 hours.

Another petition is demanding “a minimum of £300 of compensation for every student who loses contact time due to the upcoming strike action,” which 517 students signed within 24 hours of going live.

A university spokesperson responded to the students’ refund requests by stating: “since we charge a composite fee for our courses, we cannot reimburse for specific elements of missed teaching and assessment.”

Multiple students told The Mancunion they are sending emails directly to relevant university figures to insist upon personal refunds.

“I’m paying to get an education, not to have to teach myself all the material,” one student said.

“I was finally beginning to enjoy my lectures and now I’m stressed about failing this year because I’m not getting the support I need.”

Other students strongly oppose their peers’ refund demands. Matthew Caine, a second year PPE student, called the petitions “a shameless, shameless cash grab.”

“How can one be in support of the strike but then demand financial compensation, an action which directly undermines those that are striking? Maybe those in support of this [petition] should redirect their efforts towards reverting the commodification of uni education.”

Louisa Rae Reddin, a third year Philosophy and Politics student, lobbied students to show their support for the UCU’s strike to the university. She wrote in a Facebook post: “The fault lies with university management, who have failed to properly negotiate with the UCU, and have ignored previous shorter strikes by the UCU.”

88 per cent of UCU members voted to back the strike action, which will disrupt all Russell Group universities established before 1992. At Manchester University, 90 percent of members backed strike action.

Under their current pension scheme, the UCU estimates that lecturers at pre-92 universities are left £385,000 worse off than lecturers at post-92 universities.

The student representatives’ open letter also berates the University management: “The fact that our tutors have to resort to such drastic action suggests a complete disregard for their interests and highlights the bureaucratic nature of management.

“We completely support their right to strike.”

Cara Thompson, who is currently studying on a semester abroad, says she is “livid” on behalf of her former teachers and course mates. “This is the second time in two years our department’s experienced strikes as a result of staff dissatisfaction/injustices, and I feel like the UoM big dogs need to realise when they fail UoM staff they’re simultaneously failing UoM students too.”

Manchester Central MP Lucy Powell showed her support for the UCU strikes by cancelling a lecture she planned to deliver at the University of Manchester on Thursday the 22nd of February, the first day UCU members go on strike.

In a public statement, Powell declared: “I don’t cross picket lines.”

UCU general secretary Sally Hunt responded: “We welcome Lucy Powell’s decision to cancel her appearance at the University of Manchester as a show of support for striking staff.

“This is yet another disruption to university life which could be avoided if the employers step back from their damaging proposals. It’s time Universities UK listened to the many voices urging them to commit to meaningful negotiations.”

Some students, however, refused to support the UCU’s actions.

First year Caleb McCulloch said: “The fault lies with the UCU, which has failed to properly negotiate with university management and has already harmed our studies with previous shorter strikes.”

Second year Jasmine Ketch-Neumann expressed concern that the strikes will “alienate and anger the students who would otherwise be standing with their tutors.

“While I have the greatest respect for all my lecturers and will always defend their right to fair pay and pension, I sincerely hope this strike is called off.”

Certain groups of students feel particularly targeted through strike action. Language students complained that missing oral classes would hugely impact on their grades, and added to their anger at their teachers’ jobs “already being threatened.”

International students are also outraged at the potential three weeks of lost contact time. Hana Jafar, a student representative, emailed Vice-Chancellor Dame Nancy Rothwell directly, stating: “It is abhorrent that someone who is paying £15,500 a year should have to miss such a substantial chunk of valuable contact time.”

A University spokesperson sought to reassure students: “It is the University’s intention to endeavour to maintain normal operations during industrial action in order to safeguard the interests of our students.

“At this stage we do not know what the impacts of the strike will be as those on strike only need to inform us after they have taken strike action. However we are seeking to contain any disruption as best we can.

“We will therefore consider the impact and consequences of the industrial action for each student retrospectively and take any necessary corrective action where possible.

“Further information will be communicated to students as it becomes available.”

Manchester University deny houmous removal is part of BDS campaign

The University of Manchester has shot down claims that their decision to no longer stock a particular brand of houmous in its campus shop is the result of student activism.

The Boycott, Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) campaign at the University of Manchester described the decision as a “triumph” and believed it was a result of their campaigning.

Over 500 people had signed a petition calling for the University to no longer stock Sabra houmous, alleging that the “brand of hummus [is] manufactured in the occupied West Bank that is complicit in human rights violations in occupied Palestine” and that stocking the houmous “actively endorses Israel’s illegal occupation and human rights violations”.

In response to BDS’ claim, a University spokesperson said: “Sabra products are available from a wide range of shops in the UK and the decision to remove this product from the University shop was made by a new member of staff who was not aware of the correct procedure for making these choices.

“Coincidentally, and unconnected to the student representations, the shop has recently moved to a new supplier which does not have this product in its range. The decision to go with another supplier is in no way related to the student campaign.”

Sabra is a brand owned by PepsiCo and Strauss Group.

BDS claim that Strauss “invests in and financially supports the Golani Brigade of the Israeli armed forces”, who they allege “has carried out merciless human rights violations against Palestinians including arbitrary murders, assaults, incarcerations, evictions, and arrests of children, as well as the use of chemical weapons such as white phosphorus.”

BDS at the University of Manchester said: “We are delighted to hear that the university will no longer be financially supporting human rights violators like the Golani Brigade through their sale of Sabra products.

“However, the university still holds financial and institutional ties to Israel and its war crimes, which does not comply with their socially responsible investment policy. The university continues to aid Israel’s apartheid regime through its multi-million dollar investments in complicit companies such as Caterpillar, whose specially-modified armed bulldozers are used to demolish homes, schools, olive groves and communities in Palestine.”

Several students have questioned the significance of the product removal and were critical of the campaign’s description of their “triumph”.

Lawrence Rosenberg, a Jewish third-year History and Politics student, said: “The University has stated time and again it’s [sic] opposition to the BDS movement and has put out a statement affirming to students that it’s never a policy they could, nor would, adopt. It doesn’t surprise me therefore in the slightest that they’ve taken to trying to remove a single product from the shelves of a university shop in an attempt to try and blow wind into their sails.

“There is no context given to this little ‘who-ha’, it doesn’t make any sense to remove a single product from the shelves of a single store when the University of Manchester is legally obliged to not comply with their discriminatory movement.

“I’m not concerned about this, nor should anyone else be. Virtual signalling at it’s [sic] finest once again from everybody’s least favourite discriminatory movement.”

The BDS campaign group at the University of Manchester will protest on the 21st of February from 2 to 4 PM outside Whitworth Arch calling for “full divestment now”.

Sabra were contacted for comment but have yet to respond.