Motion 1: Defend all staff with particular attention to professional services (PS) and prioritise the education motive at the University of Reading

ReadingUCU notes

1. that the HE market crisis continues, with 15,000 jobs lost last year across UK HE

2. the need for serious restraint and responsible spending in the current circumstances, which appears to be contradictory to approval given by Council in March 2026 for £47m capital expenditure towards URS renovation and expenditure on consultants (data pending)

3. the developing research funding crisis triggered by UKRI ‘rebalancing’

4. lessons learned from the Gillies report into the University of Dundee’s financial crisis and the implications for our university. The report found failings were compounded by the top-down, hierarchical and reportedly over-confident style of leadership and management, a lack of transparency and clarity in respect of financial information.

5. reduced provision on degree and Masters programmes including after the Portfolio Review Pathway (PRP) at University of Reading

6. the latest email from the PVC Prof Dominik Zaum (Update on recruitment, finances and next steps) and the message from senior management covering  imminent possibilities for “significant change” in professional services

7. the initial meeting between ReadingUCU branch committee members and Prof Zaum and Claire Rolstone (HR)

ReadingUCU resolves

a. to strongly oppose management approaches that may indicate that ‘AI’ replaces the role of and need for staff focussed on good quality education, especially professional services staff.

b. to insist on recognition by UoR senior management that professional services staff form the backbone of our educational efforts at the University of Reading, and that their experience and insight is key to our shared work

c. to defend equality of access to diverse degrees and disciplines across the UK and all PS staff who deliver these or provide the necessary support

d. Reading UCU will continue to campaign and contribute to broader nationally coordinated actions from UCU such as national and regional demonstrations and parliamentary lobbies to defend HE

Motion 2: Defending USS pensions indexation

ReadingUCU notes:

1. ‘Indexation’ is the method of uprating your accrued pension. Currently USS is increased annually by a ‘soft cap’ formula based on CPI. Conditional indexation means uprating pension according to what USS’ actuaries say is affordable in a given year 
2. USS Limited and the Employers are promoting ‘Conditional Indexation’ as a future ‘reform’ of USS. The second joint Conditional Indexation (CI) report compares current DB scheme (rather than one improved by the surplus), and a hypothetical CI scheme, but fails to take proper account of political and regulatory pressures that could prevent indexation, and underestimates uncertainties involved in 30-year predictions 
3. the process of exploring CI was initiated as a response to the result of the 2020 valuation, itself a product of a poor valuation method. UCU needs to focus on ensuring the poor valuation methodology is improved. 
4. members have seen a trajectory from employers of a reduction in USS benefits since 2011, including the closure of the final salary scheme and the approaching increases in normal pension age 
5. the USS 2026 valuation of USS is likely to report a large surplus in excess of £15 billion. So the Scheme is in good health and reductions in guarantee through mechanisms such as conditional indexation are not necessary
6. USS reports indicate that through poor decisions on topics such as the Thames Water investment and LDI, USS unnecessarily lost £1bn of members’ money in poor investments twice in the past three years and continues to resist member oversight of investments. 
7. Any indexation once conditional will be dependent on investment performance and the opinions of the same USS actuaries and USS, that members have previously experienced to be characterised by groupthink
8. TPS employers now see USS as a cheaper alternative – reducing the Employer Covenant (collective underpinning) through CI makes USS even more attractive to weak and opportunistic employers. 
9. recent decisions at UCU Congress (HE Sector Conference) to continue to sceptically explore CI and to take industrial action if employers or USS try to force us down the conditional indexation path
   

ReadingUCU believes:

1. Conditional Indexation transfers risks from employers to members, and reduces the Employer Covenant; and creates greater inequality between different categories of members 
2. employers’ interest in ‘stability’ (low risk to them, low contributions and no industrial action), is different from ours – stable, fair, well-indexed, guaranteed and sustainable DB pensions for us and for future generations of staff, fair contributions, and no employer attacks on pensions.

The branch resolves:

1. to actively work within our union,  to increase members’ and employers’ understanding of the potential  risks of CI, not just its benefits. 
2. to focus on improved USS governance, accrual and benefits to keep scheme sustainable – and stop haemorrhaging members’ money 
3. to continue to work with USS to improve valuation methodologies 
4. in line with UCU policy to move to industrial action if USS or employers seek to impose CI. 

Motion 3: Trans and gender non-conforming staff and inclusion

• the deeply unsatisfactory provision of toilet facilities for trans and gender non-conforming staff
  
• that we are now moving to the next academic year without a satisfactory resolution of matters by senior management 
• the commitment of the ReadingUCU branch towards inclusion for all students and staff