Further to our recent branch meeting, here is a recap of where we are.
University finances and recruitment update
The university has announced (during an all-staff financial update and the Q&A with responses to staff questions) that they have not achieved their over-ambitious student recruitment targets (set at 15% greater than last year). While student recruitment figures are not yet finalised, the University has informed staff of an addition to the existing deficit of somewhere around £20m.
The budget for £2024-25 had previously been set at achieving a deficit of £20m. However, this further £20m deficit due to not achieving these unrealistic student recruitment targets in the budget means that Council has now been persuaded by management to increase this year’s projected deficit to £30m. However, this still leaves additional cuts of roughly £10m to be made this year. Senior mgmt intends on achieving these savings through one or more of the following 3 routes
1 restraining our capital programme
2 using investment assets to plug cash flow gaps
3 reducing operational expenses.
Of these, RUCU’s clear emphasis is on review of options (1) and (2), particularly in the short term, in order to ensure pay, conditions and workload of all staff remain safe and secure.
Based on our scrutiny of the documentation already provided to us (and with thanks to the RUCU working party scrutinising finances and recruitment figures), we formally asked the Vice Chancellor at the recent JUUC to propose to Council that the University did not make overpayments this year on existing loans, while such cuts were on the horizon. We will communicate their response to you on this shortly.
The need for transparency and good governance
Senior management are considering a range of cuts to affect the operational expenses lever, which is beyond our preferred two options as above. One key area of saving they envisage here is from delaying the implementation of the nationally agreed pay increase which was scheduled for implementation in August 2024. Although this is termed a ‘deferral’, we want to remind members that any such decision is not really a deferral as one would normally understand the term i.e. the way this deferral works isn’t such that the money would simply be paid to us at a future date (it will not be paid to us later in the format of some kind of backpay). Instead any salary increases due to us in the intervening 11 months of the ‘deferral’ would not be paid back to staff at all. We will all essentially lose that nationally agreed increase for a period of 11 months, if this ‘deferral’ is implemented i.e., it would be a deferral of the date on which the implementation of the nationally agreed pay agreement would normally take place (see linked pdf from UCEA): https://www.ucu.org.uk/media/14596/240827-Appendix—UCEA-final-offer/pdf/240827_Appendix_-_UCEA_final_offer.pdf
University management is currently in discussions with Reading UCU and the Staff Forum to explain the rationale for this proposal and we continue to contest both the need for and the validity of staff bearing the costs for what we see as poor management decision-making and good performance despite unrealistic targets. Please note that this negotiation is affected by the fact that as part of any such deferral arrangement, the University is only required to consult with us (including opening up its books to us), but it is not required to reach agreement before any such implementation. In the interest of good industrial relations both parties are expected to engage in, and are engaging in such consultation in good faith. But we are aware that this is a lever that sr management can choose to use without our consent, given their own priorities.
In order to understand the rationale for staff bearing any of the costs, RUCU has sought information, including financial information. The Vice-Chancellor has on multiple occasions repeated publicly, his commitment to transparency and accountability including at his all-staff briefings. As part of normal scrutiny, your RUCU reps typically receive Council papers (including segments that are received by the committee under terms of confidentiality). However, the most recent Council papers (which you can also request access to) provided to us have seen redactions of two key papers.·
item 5 – financial backgrounds and mitigations for 24/25
item 6 – Loddon Garden Village
We hope you will agree that without details of the financial backgrounds and mitigations under consideration, it is difficult for your committee to properly review and then discuss options with you, our members, or to make any recommendations to you. During our recent branch meeting we took a show of hands and members overwhelmingly agreed that we should push for this information so we can make informed decisions. We continue to have discussions with the University and are engaging constructively with them.
Our members are also concerned about transparency and accountability during VC all-staff talks, as staff questions are currently being amalgamated. While members recognise that this is intended to increase efficiency, it sometimes means that the amalgamation results in a change of direction and thrust to the question or a loss of nuance. Our members are also concerned that some answers contain a significant amount of spin and need to be fuller / more factual to provide an accurate response. Members have also raised the issue of more pointed questions not being published even on the chat, during the meeting. We will reiterate our expectation that going forward all questions will be published, so we can all understand the range of concerns staff wish to raise, and so that there is greater accountability consistent with the purpose of such an all-staff briefing.
We recently had a series of helpful meetings with UoR finance team. At our most recent session and having sent in a set of questions prior to the meeting, we covered a lot of ground. But it is taking the team a while to provide responses to some of the questions and so we are still awaiting some key segments of information though we have now received some of the information. We have commenced our scrutiny of what we have already received, but as with a jigsaw puzzle, it takes the appearance of a few key segments to get a sense of the whole picture.
Working Groups
Members can contribute to our ongoing work through the working parties on Academic Probation and Personal Titles; Finances and Recruitment; and Workload. We welcome those with expertise or experience in these or allied areas and are grateful for any help . The more members from different areas across the university contribute, the stronger our understanding and therefore negotiating position will be. Please email if you have any questions.
