Please note that motions have to be a maximum of 150 words and also note that if 110 delegates from pre-92 and post-92 institutions do not register by Weds 13 June, the event will not take place. You can register delegates here and submit motions here.
The following motions were passed by Cambridge UCU on 13 June 2018
The following motions were passed unanimously at the AGM of Liverpool UCU on 6 June, 2018
Motion 2a: Democracy and transparency in ongoing industrial action
Conference notes:
- the decision by the Higher Education Committee chair not to give representatives a vote on the UUK proposal at the 28 March USS meeting held at Carlow Street exposed our Union’s democratic deficit
- the subsequent claim made by the general secretary (GS) that the majority of branch representatives wanted an immediate ballot of members
Conference believes:
- a member-led union requires a democratic and transparent decision making process, both in the USS, and any future disputes
Conference resolves
- that results of the April 2018 consultative ballot to suspend action be published and broken down branch by branch
- that the rules around calling notices for branch meetings be suspended during industrial action
- that all key decisions in representative meetings end with a show of hands vote, the result of which should inform the vote of the Higher Education Committee to provide greater representation of the views of the wider membership
Motion 2b: scrutiny of the Joint Experts Panel
The Branch notes that a clear mechanism of reporting to the membership will strengthen the power of our representatives on the JEP. This Branch demands that the national union establishes a standing meeting of HE delegates to scrutinise the work of the JEP.
1.This meeting should take place in October 2018, at the annual conference in May 2019, and should follow the same bi-annual pattern until the membership (through a consultative ballot) agree that a satisfactory resolution to the dispute has been agreed.
2.Following each HE meeting, a consultative ballot should be held within 2 weeks of the meeting to establish if the membership is satisfied with progress. 3.The wording of the consultative ballot should be agreed by emergency motion at the HESC meeting. 4.Should the consultative ballot indicate that members are not happy with progress, the union will reopen its dispute with UUK.
The following motions were passed by Oxford UCU on 12 June
Handling of employer offers during disputes
Conference notes:
1. Difficulties arising during the USS dispute due to limited time for discussion and consultation.
2. The improvements to our union’s handling of disputes mandated by Congress 2018’s motion 9.
Building on this, conference resolves that:
1. During pensions, pay and other disputes, ballot text will be circulated to branch officers at least 3 working days in advance of the ballot going live.
2. In order to provide flexibility to our national negotiators, this timeframe may exceptionally be reduced to 1 working day, if a majority of our national negotiators so vote.
(90 words)
JEP (Joint Expert Panel): regular reporting and submissions from members
Conference notes the very welcome first statement from Joanne Segars OBE, chair of the Joint Expert Panel, in particular, that the JEP will:
1. provide regular reports about the JEP’s progress and the issues discussed,
2. explain clearly the evidence serving as the basis for recommendations,
3. accept submissions from USS members on all relevant issues.
Conference reaffirms the importance of these undertakings.
Conference also notes motion HE47 carried at HESC 2018 which mandates Superannuation Working Group members to agree regular reporting and feedback mechanisms with UCU appointed members of JEP.
Building on these, Conference mandates the SWG to negotiate that the JEP will report to members following each meeting of the JEP.
(110 words)
The following motion has been drafted by Marion Hersh with post-92 institutions in mind
USS members in post 92 Universities HESC notes that some staff in post-92 universities are members of USS. While these staff have not been involved in industrial action inthe USS dispute, UCU needs to find means of informing them regularly of developments in USS pensions issues and, where feasible, involvingthem in the campaign to defend USS pensions. Furthermore UCU recognises the need to identify and quantify the extent of USS membership in post 92 universities and TPS membership in pre-92 universities. HESC calls upon HEC: 1. to take active measures to identify USS members in post 92, eg through adding pension scheme membership to UCU membership records 2. contact USS members in post-92 institutions about developments in USS pensions 3. give them opportunities to be engaged in campaigning work to defend USS pensions, 4. give them a consultative voice in matters related to USS pensions.
The following motions are to be proposed by Glasgow UCU
Call for resignation of USS CEO
Conference deplores the role of the USS Chief Executive Officer in encouraging the undermining of our pensions and provoking the most sustained and disruptive industrial action in Higher Education history, including by:
1. Insisting on an inappropriate valuation approach and recklessly prudent assumptions
2. Moving from the September to November technical provisions,
3. A lack of flexibility in the implementation of the valuation deadlines and imposition of rule 74.6, thereby undermining the work of the Joiint Expert Panel.
Conference calls for the resignation of the CEO of USS.
Joint Expert Panel
Conference welcomes the setting up of the JEP and the motions of the recent HE Sector Conference about its work.
Conference agrees that UCU contract with the JEP should follow the agreed processes and that these should be publicised to members
Conference instructs HEC to
1. Publicise any refusal, delays or conditionality by USS upon releasing information to JEP.
2. Encourage members to make submissions to JEP.
3. Arrange for a dedicated area of UCU website to be set up for JEP information and reports.
Conference instructs the negotiators to Investigate the use of any surplus to improve pensions for members on casualised contracts, at the start of their careers and in equality strands. One approach would be a reduction in contributions while maintaining benefits.
The following motions were passed by Sussex’s AGM on 4 June, 2018 (motions 2 and 3 submitted to SHESC; extracts from motions 1 and 4 to be submitted as possible amendments to other motions)
- Conference believes that it is essential to the credibility of the JEP that the evidence on which it bases its conclusions should be available to all so that others can check its conclusions.
Conference therefore calls on the UCU-nominated members of the JEP to abstain from all discussions which are based on any data from USS, or on oral or written submission from third parties, which is not simultaneously made public, except in circumstances where they agree, on explicitly stated grounds, that the requirements of confidentiality override those of transparency. We call on the SWG to request the same abstention of the UCU-nominated members of the JEP.
- Conference notes that between January 1997 and October 2009, while employees’ USS contributions remained at 6.35% of salaries, the employer contribution was reduced from 18.55 to 14%. In 1999, USS actuarial estimates indicated this decrease in employer contributions would result in a shortfall of £561m that would be made up from the USS fund’s surplus. In October 2009 contributions were raised back to 16% and in April 2016 to 18%. It has been calculated that the total savings to employers, relative to what they would have paid if they had continued to contribute in proportion to employees, amounts to some £7bn.
Conference calls on UCU members of the USS JNC to demand that in the event of further requirement for increased contributions needed to eliminate any USS deficit, said contributions should be met entirely from employers, up to the total amount of savings mentioned above, plus accrued interest.
- Conference notes that the UUK offer of 23 March of a JEP, which UCU members voted to accept, stated that the remit of the JEP was to agree principles to underpin the valuation of the USS fund. It proposed that UUK and UCU would continue discussion on ‘alternative scheme design options’ but that this would happen ‘alongside the work of the panel’.
In line with this stated remit, conference calls on the UCU-nominated members of the JEP to limit themselves to discussions on the methodology of the valuation of the USS fund, and to abstain from all discussions of alternative scheme design options, including Collective Defined Contribution designs. We call on the SWG to request the same abstention of the UCU-nominated members of the JEP.
- Conference notes that the offer sent for ballot to UCU members on 4 April was not the product of a UUK-UCU negotiating committee. It notes that the General Secretary sent a total of four message to all members strongly recommending that members vote ‘yes’ to the offer, including at least one that was sent only to members who had not yet voted. Of these only the last included a copied and pasted argument for voting ‘no’. Conference considers this procedure multiply flawed.
Conference therefore requests that in case of a future ballot regarding the USS pension dispute: (1) members are only asked to vote on a proposal produced by a properly constituted UUK-UCU negotiating committee, (2) in case HEC unanimously supports one response to the ballot the General Secretary is asked to convey that recommendation in a message accompanying the ballot, (3) in case HEC is divided then the Chair of HEC asks those taking opposite views to nominate one member of HEC each to put their case to the membership in a short statement, and these statements are sent to members in a message accompanying the ballot, with a short introduction by the General Secretary summarising HEC voting figures, (4) in any case UCU HQ does not send any further recommendations to members until the ballot has closed.
The following motions were tabled at Newcastle’s AGM on 6 June 2018
JEP and transparency
Conference notes that the membership has had no role yet in shaping its structure or operation of the Joint Expert Panel.
Conference believes the JEP is not a negotiation but a fact-finding exercise and should operate from a presumption of transparency rather than confidentiality.
Conference resolves to insist that
- all materials submitted to or produced by the JEP be put into the public domain immediately
- any such material deemed to require confidentiality shall be put into the public domain in redacted form with an explanation for the redaction
- revised terms of reference for the JEP incorporating these changes be submitted to the membership of branches in dispute for approval before August for approval, and if that approval be not granted that industrial action be announced for the beginning of the 2018-2019 academic year.
Member feedback to JEP
Conference notes that the membership has had no role yet in shaping the structure or operation of the Joint Expert Panel.
Conference believes u that the JEP must have a formal mechanism to accept feedback on its operations as it is working.
Conference resolves
- that UCU members be provided immediately with a mechanism for submitting their views on the work of the JEP and the objects of the JEP’s discussion
- that the JEP formally acknowledge receipt of, discuss, and formally respond to all such submissions in a timely manner
- that revised terms of reference for the JEP incorporating these changes be submitted to the membership of branches in dispute for approval before August for approval, and if that approval be not granted that industrial action be announced for the beginning of the 2018-2019 academic year.
The following draft motions have been prepared by Carlo Morelli and Marion Hersh (both UCU USS negotiators).
Call for resignation of USS CEO (94 words)
Conference deplores the role of the USS Chief Executive Officer in encouraging the undermining of our pensions and provoking the most sustained and disruptive industrial action in Higher Education history, including by:
- Insisting on an inappropriate valuation approach and recklessly prudent assumptions
- Moving from the September to November technical provisions,
- A lack of flexibility in the implementation of the valuation deadlines and imposition of rule 74.6, thereby undermining the work of the Joiint Expert Panel.
Conference calls for the resignation of the CEO of USS.
Joint Expert Panel (128 words)
Conference welcomes the setting up of the JEP and the motions of the recent HE Sector Conference about its work.
Conference agrees that UCU contact with the JEP and its chair should involve all the elected lay negotiators and not just the General Secretary.
Conference instructs the negotiators to
- Investigate the use of any surplus to improve pensions for members on casualised contracts, at the start of their careers and in equality strands. One approach would be a reduction in contributions while maintaining benefits.
- Publicise any refusal, delays or conditionality by USS upon releasing information to JEP.
- Encourage members to make submissions to JEP.
- Arrange for a dedicated area of UCU website to be set up for JEP information and reports.
USS Trustee and Investment Committee Renumeration(144 words)
Conference notes:
- that the USS JNC under rule 71 is responsible for the renumeration, fees and expenses of the Trustee Board, the Advisory Committee, the Investment Committee, and the JNC Chair.
- In 2016 and 2017 substantial rises of23% were passed for the Trustee Board and the Investment Committee.
- Such increases agreed by UCU elected USS negotiators were not reported to or authorised by HEC.
Conference believes USS is a private organisation established and funded by publicly funded bodies and should therefore ensure it works for the public good.
Conference resolves to mandate the UCU negotiators to:
- Put pressure on USS to agree that all USS director and other fees are publicly available
- Obtain the sanction of HEC before agreeing increases in fees or expenses for JNC chair or members of the Trustee Board, Advisory Committee or Investment Committee.
Casualised Staff pensions (93 words)
Conference notes casualised staff:
- are often barred from the right to join USS by their employer.
- Have poor pension prospects
Conference resolves:
- To demand in our pay campaigns in favour of equal access to pensions for casualised staff.
- To ensure all grades of academic related, teaching and research staff have access to the USS pension scheme.
- To put a rule change through the JNC to ensure that casusalised staff retain existing pension rights during periods of a break in service without needing to make contributions.
The following motion was passed at an EGM of Goldsmiths UCU on Tuesday 12 June.
Dispute Committee terms of reference (150 words)
This Special HESC notes the passing of HE13 on 31 May 2018 that resolved to establish a national USS dispute committee (USSDC) composed of HESC delegates from USS branches in order to empower members in strategic discussions.
HESC believes that membership of the USS dispute committee should be based upon the membership criteria used for the recent Industrial Action Commission (but for USS institutions) and reflect the diversity of perspectives taken by branches in relation to employer offers in the dispute thus far.
HESC further believes that any proposed ballot text on a future employer offer concerning USS has to be approved by the dispute committee before it is put to members.
HESC mandates the HEC when it meets on 29 June 2018 to agree a provisional timetable of meetings commensurate with the meetings of the JEP and communicate this with the election procedure to USSDC branches within 14 days.
Branch Solidarity Network 