It is clear to us from emails, questions and comments shared with us in relation to the July all-staff talk with UEB that staff are very worried about the consequences for staff and students arising from the Professional Services hiring freeze and from senior management plans to further reduce the amounts spent on staff costs (both academic and PS).

Your questions and comments are informing our discussions with senior management and importantly are shaping our strategy to resist any unjustified cuts in 2026-27. Colleagues who may have missed recent emails can find our key areas of concerns set out on the emails from your branch committee dated July 17th and July 20th (the latter containing specific high-level points).

During the 21st July  all-staff talk, the VC asserted that there are no plans for large scale cross-institutional redundancies at Reading, but as we well know, such assurances come with giant caveats. The VC noted things could change (as one might imagine) and also that due to the scale of ‘savings’ needed during 26-27, redundancies as part of targeted restructurings are really possible.

While the VC noted that nothing is yet finalised, he also stated that UEB would be working on a number of these changes over the summer. We are paying close attention to this and to refining our branch strategy accordingly, especially given that some members are currently using well-earned leave.

Any redundancies, if they do arise, will need to be accompanied by formal steps for consultation with the trade union. So please continue to alert us if you or colleagues are approached in this regard or if you see any red flags over the summer.

We have had a helpful meeting earlier this week with the Chief Financial Officer, to discuss the accounts. It is early days yet but a further meeting with him is now in the diary for September and we are expecting to meet on a monthly basis till the issues are bottomed out. We are still awaiting from the VC a confidential report re: the outsourced internal auditors’ review around matters such as the “financial challenges”.

Members should be assured that while we do seek details to ensure accuracy, your committee remain focussed on big picture questions. Your committee is also very clear that we must be open-minded while at the same time thinking critically about senior management assertions (rather than accepting them at face value). For example: Does it make overall sense to us when senior management say that we have achieved and surpassed our budget target for 2025-26 while at the same time saying that they wish to deliver even more reductions to staff costs in 2026-27 (ie that if we are thinking of this as something of a marathon journey that ends with wiping out the so-called deficit, we are now already further ahead than we should be at this point in the race and we have surpassed the so-called deficit reduction targets at this point. Is it fair or indeed sustainable that staff need to run faster at this point and deliver even more cuts?. How does all this make sense if senior management are authorising spending of large amounts on system upgrades or building costs (URS), or external consultants, while demanding that staff continuously tighten belts?

Members (and the committee) should not and will not be very sympathetic to senior management trying to paint our hard-won savings as grounds for further accelerated cuts to staff costs, simply because they would now like to prioritise spends on consultants, building costs and IT systems? A further email will follow about our views on this as we reconcile the figures.

Staff continue to write to us to share deep concerns regarding the excessive spend on consultants in a number of PS areas, and we are acutely aware of the pressures being put on technology teams on the ground to deliver changes at an accelerating speed. Detailed committee discussions with management on this continue, and we will share further information in due course. But the scale of the costs for external consultants that we have seen so far is eye-wateringly large, and vindicates member worries.

Your committee has asked and received confirmation that the Staff Student Ratio (SSR) methodology that is informing UEB  decisions with respect to the reshaping of academic areas, has not been refined further since the last version we scrutinised last year. This is definitely giving us pause for concern as this methodology has been shown by our members to be disconnected from the realities on the ground. The SSR should not be being used as the basis for cuts, until rectified and made much more robust. Members need look no further as to its flawed logic, than the brutal cuts in Chemistry at UoR, using these very rough SSRs as part of the public rhetoric.

Working more efficiently and using automation or AI appears to be the new mantra from senior management, particularly in PS areas. We have highlighted to senior management, staff concerns that, especially in technology-related decisions, this push for efficiency has actually resulted in management spending more and more money on new (and what seem to us to be poorly justified) technology providers, and replacing perfectly adequate (if not perfect) technology systems with brand new and much more expensive ones. What is also concerning is that these changes are tying the university into very expensive, new, recurring contract costs from IT providers. Members have raised with us concerns that all this appears to be being done in ways that are pushing colleagues very hard (and causing associated health and safety problems) towards even burnout and by ignoring the voices of specialist colleagues who are cautioning management against such changes. There is a valid concern that plans to make these drastic changes are based on a flawed logic. While the plan is ostensibly to replace old systems and drive efficiencies by bringing new ones that are compatible with the planned AI overlay, all this rests on overestimating what AI can really deliver. There are also the huge additional costs which mean that the only people who will benefit are the IT consultants and software providers earning recurring fees, and not our staff or  students.

Since my last email to you and indeed over the past months, your committee has also been working carefully on branch matters including efforts to address casualisation, discrimination and we also continue to contribute to discussions re policy changes. We know that these policy points (whether on progression, or disciplinaries etc) can adversely affect colleagues’ day-to-day working lives, especially if the union does not pay sufficient attention. We are grateful to departmental reps, activists and caseworkers who help us grapple with these.

Your committee will continue to send you regular emails to keep you updated of any evolutions to the big picture. I hope those of you (especially PS colleagues) who are working very hard over the summer period know we are conscious of your efforts, and that those who are taking some time off actually manage to get some rest. Please continue to write to me cc’ing Ellen and Colette.

Best wishes

Deepa Driver

(Branch President, Reading UCU)

(Branch President – ReadingUCU)

Motion on Solidarity with LSBU UCU

Reading UCU notes the serious attack on the jobs of staff at LSBU UCU branch.   

Reading UCU resolves   

1. To send a message of solidarity to LSBU  
2. To pledge to donate £250 to the hardship funds of LSBU   

Motion: University of Sheffield Global Academic Boycott

This Branch notes: 

1. That national UCU has called for a global academic boycott of the University of Sheffield in response to Sheffield management’s repeated imposition of ‘double deductions’, whereby staff who took industrial action to protect their jobs and fight the cuts have been subject to further deductions if they refused to make up teaching lost to industrial action. 
2. That the boycott called for by national UCU includes: 

• To refuse to speak at or organise academic or other conferences at the University of Sheffield 
• to refuse to give lectures at the University 
• to refuse to accept positions as visiting professors or researchers at the University 
• to refuse to accept new contracts as external examiners for taught courses at the University 
• to publicly decline honorary degrees/doctorates from the University of Sheffield. 

The Branch believes that: 

1. the University of Sheffield’s actions demands a strong and coordinated response and solidarity across branches 
2. attacks on trade‑union rights at any university threaten the entire sector supporting the boycott signals that the sector will not tolerate punitive treatment of staff
   
   The Branch resolves: 

1. to publicly endorse and participate in the global academic boycott of the University of Sheffield, as called for by national UCU. 
2. to call on branch members to observe the boycott guidelines 
3. to send a message of solidarity to Sheffield UCU 
4. to pledge to donate £100 to the hardship fund of Sheffield UCU 

Reading UCU has become aware of this Open Letter from Jo Grady to University of Reading on Supreme Court ruling: sent on 19th May 2026

Further to our recent branch meeting, I am writing to keep all members updated on the various things your RUCU committee, case workers and departmental reps are working on:    

• Consultations (largely covering redundancies): Committee members have been in a number of detailed and important discussions both at university level, and at the level of services or departments that have been affected. I will not include too much detail in this email for reasons of privacy and sensitivity. But we know members recognise the “drip-drip” nature of small changes that over time, can lead to a complete overhaul of  the workplace, ethos, culture and student offering / support at the University.

• Our caseworkers have contributed to supporting members during what is a very stressful time and I would like to thank them for this important work

• The branch committee are also acutely conscious that precarity travels and indeed has travelled around our university. On the one hand we are working hard with the university to move more precariously employed colleagues into permanent roles. On the other, repeated rounds of change and redundancy for those in permanent positions, have led to an erosion in the feeling of security one can expect to have in any permanent roles. This has implications for students, colleagues and the institution.
• Of the various consultations that have recently taken place, I want to particularly flag the change in internal audit that has seen the appointment of an external provider to deliver these important checks and balances.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: We ask members to encourage non-members to join the union. It is also worth reminding new members that UCU offer very reasonable rates for those who are lower paid. https://www.ucu.org.uk/subscriptions

Note: Often by the time a problem hits, it is too late to join the union and request meaningful union support, especially given the window of time that must elapse after joining the union to be eligible for matters such as legal support.

That said, as many of our members will attest, joining the union is not just some sort of insurance policy to use in case of difficult circumstances at work. Mutual solidarity, shared learning and a sense of commitment to education and to our communities at work and beyond, without expectations of receiving something in return, are core to the membership of our trade union. As we mark the 100-year anniversary of the 1926 nationwide general strike, we are aware of the sacrifices that have granted us the hard-fought workers’ rights that have vastly improved the situation of working people and we work to continue to advance workers’ rights in that tradition .

• USS Pensions: As we head to Congress 2026, the topic of more joint work by UCEA, USS and UCU on the potential for conditional indexation (CI) of the USS pension scheme will be one of the important themes we will be discussing at the HE Sector conference. different views will be articulated. Southern region alongside other branches is taking forward a motion (HE11). This motion is driven by the concern that onditional indexation is a one-way risk transfer from employers to members. With war, increasing inflation, stagnant wages and the crises in many segments of HE, the worry is that introducing conditionality to indexation creates huge, lifelong vulnerabilities for members. With many competing pressures on union resources, it is vital that UCU remains acutely sensitive to best using resources and energies towards those matters that will deliver good outcomes for workers, and not create more risks. There are many arguments for and against CI and the motion argues that there is a strong case against CI and for us to explore other means to increase Scheme stability if we want long-term value, that does not include imposing conditionality on indexation. To contribute to this debate I have written an article on this and would be very grateful if you could read, comment on and  circulate this article (written in a personal capacity) via email and whatsapp or other social media to colleagues and friends including deferred or retired members of the USS scheme. https://henrytapper.com/2026/04/27/why-we-should-not-gamble-away-our-retirement/ 
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS:  Please would you  prompt discussions with UCU members and non-members alike, because the topic of CI is important and UCU represents all members of the USS Scheme, not just those who are unionised. Please feel free to share the article if you so wish, with non-members are it is written with all USS members in mind.  
• USS commutation factors, which are reviewed regularly, are due to change on 01 October 2026 and our national pensions official has contacted the branch with information which we have shared with UCU members . You can find more information on the mail from me regarding commutation and also here. Some highlights are  “Exchanging pension for extra lump sum:  If you want to exchange some of your Retirement Income Builder pension for more lump sum, USS uses a commutation factor. On 01 October 2026, the factors will change and members may be slightly worse off than if they exchanged pension for more lump sum before 01 October 2026. Exchanging lump sum for extra pension: If you want to exchange some (or all) of your lump sum for more pension, USS uses a reverse commutation factor. On 01 October 2026, the factors will change and members may be slightly better off than if they exchanged lump sum for pension before 01 October 2026. You can get further information on Commutation factors here. Please do not accept this message as financial advice and members considering accessing their pension should seek independent financial advice. UCU members can, if they wish, use the services of Quilter Financial Advisers whom we have a partnership arrangement with. You can get further information here.” 
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS:  Please would you share with UCU members and non-members alike so all USS members are aware of the changes .  

• Academic Workload Model: We see this as a large and critical piece of work for the branch. The branch committee has gathered feedback based on initial information the project team led by senior managers have shared with us. I would like to thank departmental reps and caseworkers for the helpful feedback that informed our early rounds of response to this. While this has been a constructive engagement with the project team, we are acutely aware that we have been told that some materials that we have been shown are not yet in a position to be shared further with members (and we respect this request at this stage), We have made the project team aware that our members remain concerned that other actions on the management side have however been moving along in departments and schools. We are also acutely aware, and made a very strong case to the concerned senior management lead, that our members must be meaningfully engaged with, as such workload models can have very long-term implications. They can impact a range of topics, beyond workload management, including on progression, survival of roles and long-term careers.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: We would be grateful if members from some schools that are “piloting” the model could write to Ellen (ellen.ucu@proton.me) and me (deepadriver@protonmail.com) cc Colette (cmaxfield@ucu.org.uk) with any details or concerns they may be aware of. Any wider information to support our work on this project is also welcome. Members willing and able to contribute to the work are also, as always, welcome.
• Stress Risk Assessments and Workload: We have kicked off work on stress risk assessments. This is a space where we share expertise nationally and engage with the University Health and Safety Committee and HR, so as to effectively use legal rights and local negotiation possibilities. We press amongst other matters, for safe workplaces and appropriate and manageable workloads for all staff. Our work with UoR management on addressing risks arising from stress, is at any early stage.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: If you are in a (line) managerial role, please help us by actively using local escalation routes within the University’s managerial structures to address the complex issue of stress in a way that protects the safety and health of all staff. It would also be useful to highlight to RUCU committee circumstances where such internal escalation has not resulted in resolving matters despite your repeated attempts. Those in managerial roles, through their own actions in the day job in the workplace, can thus help to embed worker-friendly workplace practices and thereby further employment rights in a structural sense. The casework route continues apace for those members who specifically need direct support.
• URS Building – At the last JUUC, we raised our concerns regarding upwards of £40 million that will be invested in the changes to the URS building at a time when austerity and tightening of budgets is adversely affecting workloads, our experience of the workplace and importantly our students. The VC has confirmed that our comments were made known to Council Senior management and council have commenced work on the building, although they have yet to address the concerns and questions we raised. While we continue to press for them to address these, we will be monitoring closely the budget, risks, spending on and financial consequences of this project, so that staff and students are not asked to bear the burden, risks and costs of such decision-making.
• We are also acutely aware more widely of institutions (where UCU members are currently under attack) that have haemorrhaged time and all manner of resource on white elephant projects, where staff had subsequently to bear the costs of management decision-making in the form of job losses, pensions cuts and unsafe workloads. Our members (and senior management) will. we know, not want to see such outcomes at our University. The Gillies report to the Scottish Funding Council https://www.sfc.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Gillies-Report.pdf may be of particular interest to members.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: Please take a look at the Gillies report, which may help flag some parallels more generally with many universities today including our own, so we can ensure such mistakes are not repeated at UoR. Please continue to share with us information that you consider relevant to our work with governance bodies and senior management of UoR, so we can continue to raise and document matters of great importance to members.
• Equalities, facilities provision and solidarity with disabled and trans colleagues: It is over 300 days since a decision was taken to abruptly disrupt trans-inclusive policies (11th June 2025) and we continue to hear from members about the impact that these policy changes have had. Current facilities provision remains lacking for trans and gender non-conforming staff and students and members have told us that the approach that senior management have taken to address this through redesignated of accessible facilities has directly impacted disabled colleagues and students ,
• While we continue to press these matters with senior management locally, Regional Office have also been providing advice and support to members involved in raising issues. We see this as a multi-pronged effort and support and recognise the important work of colleagues in the staff networks at the University. We also recognise that this is a wider equalities issue that is impacting many members and not just those who are trans/gender non-confirming or disabled . We also know that such matters go beyond simply access to a toilet. We have raised our members’ concerns regarding the changes to the Bullying and Harassment Policy.
• We also note the recent successful appeal by The University of Sussex against the fine imposed by the OfS. UCU nationally are digesting what this means for inclusive policies and freedom of speech and will no doubt share further materials with members.
• Your committee remain steadfastly committed to equality, diversity and inclusion for all members. Our next JUUC meeting with senior management is in a few weeks and we intend to continue to press matters on this front.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: We continue to ask colleagues to contact Colette if they need specific casework support. We also ask members who are in line management roles, to raise concerns consistent with their managerial responsibilities and duty of care. Please encourage those in the management hierarchies to formally escalate lack of access (and consequences of such failings) and to use their positions within the formal structures of the university to take action to resolve these matters.

• Casework: I would like to thank Colette (who coordinates our case work) and our case workers, who continue to play a vital role in securing the rights of colleagues who are in all manner of difficult situations. The commitment and consideration our caseworkers show is deeply valued, and their work plays a key part of what we offer via the UCU branch,
• Marking the 1926 general strike, contributing to local history and the idea of RUCU Time Bank: The committee would like to encourage active participation by members who often have limitations arising from the paucity of time and therefore can’t offer a regular ongoing commitment. To do this, we are setting up an RUCU time bank.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: Please write to Colette ccing Ellen and me, if you are able to make a contribution of anywhere between 1 and 5 hours every academic year as you contribution to the union. The tasks those hours could we devoted to, include:
  • helping us prepare for, and staff a 45 minute UCU stand in your department or service’s building foyer. You will be accompanied by committee members or reps and won’t be on your own.
  • helping to design and / or sew a new ReadingUCU cloth banner for us to take on national demos, marches and use at pickets. This is what UCU’s other branches’ banners look like.
  • We are hoping to revitalise the UCU branch office as a space where members can engage with this work in a convivial atmosphere (accompanied by tea and biscuits)
  • helping ReadingUCU to make a written contribution to a pamphlet marking 100 years since the 1926 general strike, which we would like to deliver to our sister unions at the RTUC as a contribution from members across the university.
  • bringing other ideas you would like us to work together on, as a union
• Solidarity to UCU branches in dispute: Recently I spoke at the London Met Picket where staff are striking against far-reaching cuts. I was also invited to speak at the Ulster UCU meeting to contest redundancies and was energised by the mobilisation of the branch. Our branch invited Melissa D’Ascenzio (Dundee) and Stephen Desmond (Southampton Solent) to tell us about the struggles they are in. They spoke at our most recent branch meeting about the cuts affecting Scottish branches, and the disgusting attack on pensions in our region at Southampton Solent https://www.ucu.org.uk/article/14481/Solent-University-staff-to-strike-for-5-days-in-fight-to-save-pension.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: We hope Reading members who live in or near Southampton or are able to commute, will visit their pickets next week (8am-12 noon – Tue 5^th May – Friday 8^th May at The Spark Building, Southampton Solent University, East Park Terrace, Southampton, SO14 0YN)
•  Committee members continue to contribute to Solidarity Movement organising meetings (all members welcome – the meeting takes place online on Tuesdays 6-7 pm) and we also continue to attend pickets and solidarity meetings for branches on strike. Our branch has also made small solidarity donations.
• RTUC meetings: I would like to thank our rep to the Reading Trades Council, John Oversby, who continues to help us maintain a strong contribution to the local trade unions and community. This is important work.
• ACTION REQUESTED FROM MEMBERS: Any members who would like to join John in contributing to these efforts would be welcome and the time commitment is not expected to be large.

The matters above, are in addition to work involved re: Senate and Council, finances, case work, departmental matters led by our departmental reps, and more. But I will stop here. As you can see, it has been a long list of things your committee is seeking to make progress on. Thanks again to reps, case workers, Colette, activists, regional and committee members for their efforts. Please continue to attend branch meetings, speak to your departmental reps and to committee,  and please do write to us, so we can fully reflect your concerns and priorities. We are always keen to hear from you

In solidarity

Deepa

(Branch President – ReadingUCU)

Solent UCU Picket Lines

Dundee and London Met UCU (photos courtesy of Dundee and London Met UCU):