Important: on amending the current "offer" from UUK. A number of people have asked whether it is possible to argue for an amendment/counter offer at this stage. Here we explain, given confirmed information about the status of this offer, why this is possible & necessary...
First: the "offer" does *not* have the status of an agreed or negotiated offer between UUK and our negotiating team. Has now been confirmed by an elected negotiator, that a) the text has *not* undergone any discussion/negotiation by the negotiators, b) it arrived Fri. 2.30pm...
as part of a conference call and was released to members just after 4pm - a space of 2 hours-ish, with no modification or assessment by the negotiators, c) UCU negotiators *were told that they could not make any changes to the text* as it was a UUK document, d) the negotiators...
were *not asked* if this was sufficient to put to members, or whether it should be put at this stage, they were just informed the employers were releasing it at 4pm, e) so, the text from Sally Hunt that came with the document is not a text agreed as the negotiators'...
view on the "offer" - it happened in spite of them rather than with them. This means the status of the "offer" is *not* a scrutinised, worked, and *negotiated* text by our negotiating team (including our elected negotiators), it is just what the employers sent as a first blush...
The "offer" says "Should this process prove acceptable to all parties this could provide the basis for the UCU to consult its branches and members on ending the industrial action" (8) it does not say that ending the industrial action is either a requirement of accepting...
any part of the offer, or of considering/negotiating on the offer. It does not say this is the final offer that has been agreed as what will be put to members. In fact the vague language, condensed ideas, and interpretable concepts within the "offer" show it is the beginning...
gambit in a negotiation round - nothing else is indicated. This leads us to a number of important conclusions to be drawn from this about our action and how we should approach the discussion of this "offer" at special meetings and on Weds at the branch delegates meeting at UCU...
First: commentators who have been saying "we should accept this offer" and "we can now wind up the strike action" have not understood its status - they've taken the beginning of a negotiation process as the endpoint where we must decide if we like the final product or not...
- a tactical mistake in the light of the status of this doc. Secondly: ending a strike when you have a text that you want, and need, to fix loses you the leverage you need in fixing it. If employers were brought to making this proposal by the strike, the impending action can...
leverage more into it. Thirdly, sending an uncooked offer to the membership without allowing our negotiators to discuss it properly (they were given an hour to look at it), comment and suggest changes/tightening it up, & to initiate feedback & recall the branch delegates to...
decide on it and whether it should be put to the members for ballot and ending the dispute is a deeply worrying and concerning move. A fundamental and essential step in the process has been missed - the poring over the details, asking questions as to meaning,...
testing of clauses, amending, and tightening of definitions etc., i.e, *negotiations*. It is probably for that reason that so much of the UCU membership (judging by twitter and email correspondence) is both confused and troubled about this proposal - it's simply not ready for...
putting to the branches as a final document, let alone balloting our members. Fourthly, as we've argued the proposal has no guarantees (and lots of vagueness) on the future of DB. It needs a #SecurityClause guaranteeing that whatever the panel produces (deadlock; deficit...)...
the employers who took a contributions holiday that would have paid for the fake deficit, & who have chosen a valuation approach that creates the problem, should pay for addressing that for one cycle of valuation post 2019- not the members. We've been presented with a draft &...
it is not only opportunity but also our responsibility to edit this draft and fix it to the greatest extent possible before any talk of "accepting", "putting it to members", or "ending the strike". Apols for v long thread! #NoCapitulation #NoDeflection #SecurityClause #USSstrike
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
