Dear Mr. Roper,
I would like to reiterate and emphasise UCU’s commitment to working with you and the senior management team at the University. We believe that our previous recognition agreement is still operative since no other agreement has been negotiated. Despite repeated assertions that the position has changed, Ms Link has not shown us any basis for those claims. As one of the recognised trades unions at London Metropolitan University, therefore, we are keen to demonstrate that commitment in practical ways.
In July 2005, the University and UCU (then NATFHE) agreed, as part of the settlement of our dispute, to negotiate several issues at ACAS. These negotiations have not yet taken place. As you know, UCU would be pleased to meet you at any time to discuss the contractual matters left over from 2005. These include: PADAS, consultancy, termination of service, duty of care and the disputes procedure. We look forward to completing these discussions in a positive manner.
In the period since we negotiated a new contract, a number of matters have arisen to add to this list. The March HR bulletin contained a list of policies that are awaiting discussion or agreement with the trades unions: flexible working, acting up and several codes of practice, to name but a few. Previously the university wrote to UCU with regard to hourly paid lecturers. This is a very urgent issue given the number of staff affected. In addition, new contracts of employment for professors and researchers need to be negotiated now that the contract of employment for teaching staff has been agreed and new legislation on age discrimination may necessitate changes of policy.
UCU can offer expertise and input on many other issues as well. In our meeting with Lyn Link in January, Barry Jones offered assistance with the implementation of HERA, on which UCU now has vast experience. We believe that as representatives of staff who have a commitment to the interests of the University we could also bring much to discussions about future plans for the University. At a time of financial difficulty and changes in the higher education sector, it makes good sense to involve all those who have a stake in the University to develop a collective responsibility for implementing change.
The University also has a statutory duty to consult and work with UCU on a variety of issues. New legislation on gender equality and disability requires a partnership approach and since the University prides itself on widening participation, it would be anomalous for the University to be slow in putting this into effect. Equally, the University has an obligation to consult UCU over potential redundancies and ways of avoiding them. UCU is keen, as I am sure you are, to explore every opportunity to avoid more redundancies. Finally, of course, we can offer UCU’s experience of implementing the Framework Agreement (another statutory duty) to ensure the best outcome for the University.
UCU stands ready to engage on all these issues, as Barry emphasised in his letter to Governors. Our members are clear that they see the union as the best representative of their interests and recent lack of support for the Staff Representative Council suggests that this opinion is widely held across the University.
The management of London Metropolitan University have challenged UCU to show that we wish to make a positive contribution. We believe that we have demonstrated this and we are happy to reiterate our commitment. However, we would respond in kind by challenging management to engage with the Union so that we may mutually add ‘value’ to the strategies of the University.
We remain ready to meet you to discuss any outstanding issues. To that end, I suggest that we call a JCNC as soon as possible to discuss the best timetable and place for such discussions. We would be available to meet with you on the following dates: May 10th –11th, 14th-15th, 17th – 18th.
Yours sincerely,
Amanda Sackur
Chair, Co-ordinating Committee,
London Metropolitan UCU