Our university campaigning is no 'charade'

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/21/no-university-campaigning-union-charade

Version 0 of 1.

Professor Peter Scott is right in his assertion that our universities are spending with largesse on new buildings and senior managers' pay, which can only be afforded by holding down salaries for most of their staff (Our underpaid academics need stronger unions, 1 July).

However, rather than address the failings, particularly by those at the top, Scott blames the malaise of the sector and the low levels of morale on the one organisation fighting for staff – the University and College Union. He says: "Trade unions have become too weak – for their members, and the public, good." And he continues: "Every year or so the same charade repeats itself. The University and College Union breathes fire and threatens one-day strikes and exam boycotts. Vice-chancellors talk tough, although they know there is absolutely no threat. Then it all fizzles out."

Bu there is no annual "charade". UCU members have seen their pay cut by 13% since 2009. That was the year when a healthy three-year pay deal, won through a sustained campaign of industrial action and a marking boycott in 2006, ran out. UCU did not organise any sustained national industrial action over pay in higher education for the next seven years. Then in 2013, when all but five vice-chancellors earned more than the prime minister and new buildings were going up left, right and centre on campuses, our members snapped. They embarked on a campaign that saw them strike six times and move to the brink of a marking boycott.

Scott accuses us of making "shrill calls for radical action, which everyone knows cannot be delivered". But after last year's campaign we now have a national agreement which doubled the previous year's pay rise for all to 2%. We also secured the living wage for the lowest paid in our universities. We are one of the few unions to breach the government's public sector pay policy, and we also secured a commitment to address the gender pay gap and the scandal of hourly paid and casual staff.

Scott accuses our union of irrelevance. He says: "The real reason for what its critics regard as UCU's antics is its impotence and irrelevance. It has nothing much else to do." To accuse a trade union of doing nothing but make empty strike threats is disingenuous and suggests a lack of understanding of what unions do. Our voluntary university-based members and national network of paid officials are overrun with individual casework and local disputes. That might not hit the headlines but it can make all the difference to people who are struggling in their workplaces day to day.

We often feel like a lone voice in a crowded sector: support can be hard to come by. Scott is very welcome to get more involved.