Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

Union dispute disrupting graduations

Bearing in mind the high proportion of students who use these boards, I'm extremely surprised that no one has made a thread about this. I don't know how many of you are affected by this. It's about the university lecturers pay dispute.

My opinions about this are well-known, and they're ones many have disagreed with. I've said in the past that lecturers who refuse to mark work should be sacked. It's an opinion I stand by. I also believe that this is a perfect example of why trade union powers need to be curbed. They have shown themselves clearly incapable of using powers properly, and are simply keeping this dispute going to further their own selfish, despicable agenda. The Press Association has done a little survery which suggests students at 39% of universities are being affected by this disgraceful state of affairs. >> Details >>

Industrial action has led to unmarked coursework and disrupted exams at Aberdeen, Birmingham, Edinburgh, Keele, Liverpool, Manchester Metropolitan University, Plymouth and several other universities. (this is just a small list I've compiled from several press reports)

Normally, I would get very angry when the Government interferes in disputes. I think in this exceptional case that they will have to. New Labour must order the unions to accept the highly generous 12.6% pay increase offer on the table, and then legislate to ensure this dispute is never, ever repeated. But will it happen? New Labour is still too dependent on trade unions for its funding. We have trade unions using students as a political football, and a government incapable of doing anything about it.

There's no doubt many will disagree with what I'm saying here, but I'm prepared to defend it. If you don't agree, what do you suggest is a good way to end this shameful dispute?
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«1

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    There have been several threads about this recently :confused:
    Either these threads were done whilst I was away, or I'm looking in the wrong places.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not moaning about it because it's no having an effect in my department :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    \
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Obviously I am biased as I work in a university, but I completely disagree with everything Stargalaxy has said. (That is not particularly unusual though, I generally disagree with everything he says.)
    I've noticed. :p So, what do you think they should do to end this farce? It's all well and good disagreeing with me, but if you won't suggest an alternative way, it makes objecting rather pointless.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think that it's a cynical time to call a strike, however the Unions are using the tools at their disposal to put pressure on the employers.

    Perhaps another question is why did they feel that they needed to take such drastic steps or is there a suggestion that actually they went into negotiations with this planned action in mind?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Perhaps another question is why did they feel that they needed to take such drastic steps or is there a suggestion that actually they went into negotiations with this planned action in mind?
    Not even I believe that the union ringleaders are that stupid. Universities have made several offers, each one better than the last, and still they refuse to take it seriously. The unions have put themselves in a corner, and they don't know how to get out of it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The unions have put themselves in a corner, and they don't know how to get out of it.

    It's a PR nightmare for them, because no matter how bad the University approach has been, it's the Unions who will [rightly] take the blame for the timing of the action and I am not sure that they realised that when they went to their members.

    That said, how else could they make an impact?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think that it's a cynical time to call a strike, however the Unions are using the tools at their disposal to put pressure on the employers.

    Perhaps another question is why did they feel that they needed to take such drastic steps or is there a suggestion that actually they went into negotiations with this planned action in mind?

    They asked to debate the pay issue with the Universities in October, this isnt a cynical time to call the strike if they've been doing it for ages already.

    The universities have plainly left it right to the last minute in an effort to make the unions back down.

    Its not 12% really, because its 12% over three years.

    They were promised a chunk of the extra money going to universities because of the top up fees and now they are being conned out of it.

    SG; - Are you basically saying that with all governmental workers the government should be able to set their pay and they should have no negotiating power at all?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's a PR nightmare for them, because no matter how bad the University approach has been, it's the Unions who will [rightly] take the blame for the timing of the action and I am not sure that they realised that when they went to their members. That said, how else could they make an impact?
    The trade unions knew action at this time would cause disruption. Whether they knew it would cause this much is open to question. The unions have made their point. Yes, pay for lecturers is too low. You've made your point. Accept the offer that's been made, get back to work, and re-visit this issue in the future. If they want to complain about pay, they could also mention the massive pay rises that vice-chancellors have received in recent years?
    bongbudda wrote:
    SG; - Are you basically saying that with all governmental workers the government should be able to set their pay and they should have no negotiating power at all?
    Don't be stupid. What kind of interpretation is that? I'm saying the government should interfere in this if the dispute doesn't end soon. Nothing more.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The trade unions knew action at this time would cause disruption. Whether they knew it would cause this much is open to question. The unions have made their point. Yes, pay for lecturers is too low. You've made your point. Accept the offer that's been made, get back to work, and re-visit this issue in the future. If they want to complain about pay, they could also mention the massive pay rises that vice-chancellors have received in recent years?

    So you accept its too low, but they should just put up with it?

    I'm far from the most union friendly person, 9 times out of 10 I think they are unjustified (esp the Tube) but this is actually more important than just pay. If they dont win our universities are going to go down hill and fast.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    They asked to debate the pay issue with the Universities in October, this isnt a cynical time to call the strike if they've been doing it for ages already.

    They been debating since October, but chose to strike during exam time. Why not September? January?

    Of course it was cynical and it isn't doing their cause much good. The NUS are much more likely to be an ally at any other time of the year, instead they've just pissed them off.
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The unions have made their point. Yes, pay for lecturers is too low. You've made your point. Accept the offer that's been made, get back to work, and re-visit this issue in the future.

    Why should they accept something which is not acceptable? I think that they should return to work for now, but not having accepted the offer. They should walk out again on the first day of term in September...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They been debating since October, but chose to strike during exam time. Why not September? January? Of course it was cynical and it isn't doing their cause much good. The NUS are much more likely to be an ally at any other time of the year, instead they've just pissed them off.
    The NUS don't know what to do. On the one hand, students are angry with being used as political footballs. On the other, they have lecturers to keep on side. They're being pulled both ways and the response of the NUS satisfies no one.
    Why should they accept something which is not acceptable? I think that they should return to work for now, but not having accepted the offer. They should walk out again on the first day of term in September...
    Cheeky... :p ...yes, I do have a self-interest in this debate, but I'm hardly the only one!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    They asked to debate the pay issue with the Universities in October, this isnt a cynical time to call the strike if they've been doing it for ages already.
    Come off it. Why not strike during the summer admissions season, when the impact on current students would be negligible but universities may notice the lack of new recruits?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Don't be stupid. What kind of interpretation is that? I'm saying the government should interfere in this if the dispute doesn't end soon. Nothing more.
    stargalaxy wrote:
    New Labour must order the unions to accept the highly generous 12.6% pay increase offer on the table, and then legislate to ensure this dispute is never, ever repeated.

    I obviously am being stupid, because you saying that they should be forced to accept a pay offer which they dont like sounds a lot like the government setting the wages for employees and the employees having no say in it to me.

    Perhaps you could point out where I've gone wrong with it?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Kentish wrote:
    Come off it. Why not strike during the summer admissions season, when the impact on current students would be negligible but universities may notice the lack of new recruits?

    Would we or any media be debating it if they called a strike over the summer?

    I accept its a fairly ugly thing to do, but its needed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Would we or any media be debating it if they called a strike over the summer?
    So what? Surely a strike is between employees and employer? It shouldn't be down to the media to exert pressure, and it shouldn't be down to third parties either (i.e. fee paying students).
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    I obviously am being stupid, because you saying that they should be forced to accept a pay offer which they dont like sounds a lot like the government setting the wages for employees and the employees having no say in it to me. Perhaps you could point out where I've gone wrong with it?
    The unions are being greedy. Do they think that universities are awash with money? I'm informed that quite a few are in heavy debt at the moment, and that the new £3000 a year tuition fees (lower at some places) won't go all the way towards fixing that. You cannot ask them to make pay offers they cannot afford. Would these lecturers prefer to take a huge increase, and a few months later, risk being made redundant by universities that can't afford to keep them on?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Would we or any media be debating it if they called a strike over the summer?

    I accept its a fairly ugly thing to do, but its needed.

    :yes:

    It's cynical, but if that's the only way to raise the profile. Now that they've achieved that, they should return to work until September which gives time for the Unis to come up with another offer. There is no reason why it cannot be backdated....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The unions are being greedy. Do they think that universities are awash with money? I'm informed that quite a few are in heavy debt at the moment, and that the new £3000 a year tuition fees (lower at some places) won't go all the way towards fixing that. You cannot ask them to make pay offers they cannot afford. Would these lecturers prefer to take a huge increase, and a few months later, risk being made redundant by universities that can't afford to keep them on?

    So you are saying that government workers should have no say in their pay then?

    Who decides 'greedy'? The government?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    So you are saying that government workers should have no say in their pay then? Who decides 'greedy'? The government?
    Stop trying to distort what I say to suit your agenda. You know exactly what I'm saying, and you're deliberately pretending you don't.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Stop trying to distort what I say to suit your agenda. You know exactly what I'm saying, and you're deliberately pretending you don't.

    I'm trying to clarify, you said that the Union should be forced to take this pay offer, and I'm trying to work out what this means for all other government employees.

    When should the government say they are being greedy and force a pay agreement on them?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    The unions are being greedy.

    They are?

    ...and 12% over three years is generous is it?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    I'm trying to clarify, you said that the Union should be forced to take this pay offer, and I'm trying to work out what this means for all other government employees.

    When should the government say they are being greedy and force a pay agreement on them?
    Right, I'll try and explain again. The only reason I am saying the government should intervene is because this dispute is getting worse and worse. The exact pay rises are a matter for the universities in question, not the government. They need to bring this dispute to an end, or if not to an end, close it down for the time being, as this stand-off benefits no one.

    This is one thing I find baffling. How come Labour was so keen to pick a fight on the fire fighters a few years ago, but aren't so keen to pick a fight now? What has changed so much in that time period?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    Right, I'll try and explain again. The only reason I am saying the government should intervene is because this dispute is getting worse and worse. The exact pay rises are a matter for the universities in question, not the government. They need to bring this dispute to an end, or if not to an end, close it down for the time being, as this stand-off benefits no one.

    So the government should force people back to work, and postpone the dispute, till when?

    And if they cant agree at a later date will you remove their right to strike again?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    So the government should force people back to work, and postpone the dispute, till when? And if they cant agree at a later date will you remove their right to strike again?
    They can always look at the settlement again during the summer. Something along the lines of "alright, we'll take the offer for now, but we're not that happy with it. We'll be looking at this over the summer, and we'll come back to you". A face-saving option for the unions, and something I never, ever thought I was going to suggest to them. :p
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    They can always look at the settlement again during the summer. Something along the lines of "alright, we'll take the offer for now, but we're not that happy with it. We'll be looking at this over the summer, and we'll come back to you". A face-saving option for the unions, and something I never, ever thought I was going to suggest to them. :p

    This is a bit different from your opening comments about forcing the unions to take the pay offer.

    I'll ask again, what happens if they cant agree later on, will you remove their right to strike again? And if so for how long?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    I'll ask again, what happens if they cant agree later on, will you remove their right to strike again? And if so for how long?
    That's a very theroetical question. We'd cross that bridge if we came to it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote:
    That's a very theroetical question. We'd cross that bridge if we came to it.

    Your position seems to be mellowing, first its 'sod the union force them to have the pay offer or sack them' now its 'lets debate, they are under paid'.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    bongbudda wrote:
    Your position seems to be mellowing, first its 'sod the union force them to have the pay offer or sack them' now its 'lets debate, they are under paid'.
    Moi? Mellowing? You'd never have believed it, would you? :p Alright then, let's have that debate.
Sign In or Register to comment.