Negotiations over workload model at UWE continue
Negotiations over workload model at UWE continue between members of the UWE branch of the Universities and Colleges Union and UWE management. The possibility of industrial action in the new academic year has not been ruled out.
An industrial dispute between UWE management and academic staff members of the UWE branch of the University and College Union (UCU) has been suspended, pending further negotiations over a proposed new workload model for teaching staff.

The dispute began when members of UWE UCU branch opposed a number of articles in the new model. Although a long way off and unlikely, the dispute being resumed and industrial action being taken has not been ruled out by either UWE management or UWE UCU members.

The UWE branch of UCU has around 700 members; one of the largest in the UK. The UCU website states that the function of the union is “To negotiate on behalf of its members and to offer support and assistance where necessary, but in addition, it also acts as a monitor ensuring that universities follow all the necessary legal and negotiated steps in their working practices.”

Vice-Chair of the UWE branch of UCU Dr. Peter Broks was very clear that “We are talking about industrial action should it be necessary as a last resort to protect our members. UCU at UWE is committed to protecting members from further exploitation.”

Deputy Vice-Chancellor, John Rushforth said, on the remote prospect of industrial action, “It’s not something that we’re seeking to provoke” and that “Any industrial action can only hinder students’ experience.”
UWE Students’ Union Vice-President, Gail Wilson stated that “We would be highly unlikely to support any industrial action as it punishes students and will prevent students from graduating and obtaining employment.”

The proposed new model would set out a common working model across the university relating to among other things, teaching hours, hours per student and contact time between students and lecturers.

John Rushforth explained to Western Eye that “There isn’t currently a common model across the uni. This new model is very transparent. It means that managers and academics have a clear means of discussing workload issues in a fair and reasonable way.” He continued by adding that in addition to being more workable from a logistical point of view, the new model would enable students to gain a “Much clearer understanding of what the entitlement of the student is.”

Peter Broks stated that “UCU agree that there is a need for staff and students to have a more consistent experience across the university.” Unfortunately UCU members do not see the proposed new model as meeting the needs of staff or students. The UCU website states that “On April 1st 2009, the management presented the proposed workload model to the branch executive as part of a consultation process. During the following months, the university produced version after version of the model and we repeated the same objections which were duly ignored.”

Mal Hughes, Negotiating Secretary of UCU at UWE, shared his concerns over the proposed new model with the Western Eye. “Whatever the stated intention, the result of the proposed academic workload model will be to increase class sizes and/or to reduce contact time, and the student experience will be further compromised.”

Peter Broks further stated that “Fewer staff and increased workloads would mean less contact, larger classes, fewer specialist modules and so less choice for students.”

John Rushforth refuted this statement and assured Western Eye that “The model will not generate changes in contact time.” He further mitigated the current proposed model by stating that “We haven’t yet got fully accurate data loaded into the model.”

This is in contrast to the position of the UWE UCU branch, Peter Broks said that “The model may not be about increasing class sizes and reducing contact, but it is about increasing w workloads for academic staff.”
The effect of the new model and even its intent of purpose appear to be the subject of much debate and confusion.

UWE management claim that the model is there to help both students and staff by placing a uniform system across all faculties and subjects. The UWE UCU branch claims that the model is unworkable in its current form and that the student experience and teaching staff will suffer as a result.

Peter Broks stated that “UCU is in favour of a common workload model, but not this one. Staff experience is equally important to us since it rebounds on the students if they [staff] aren’t able to manage their workload”

John Rushforth insists that the proposed new model is about “Rebalancing the workload” – not increasing it.

The concept of a new workload model at UWE has, according to UWE UCU staff, been under discussion for nearly four years. Peter Broks claimed that “A common workload model was first discussed in 2006 in response to UCU concerns about enormous disparities in the teaching resources across the university.”

John Rushforth told Western Eye that the new model would ultimately result in the “Allocation of resources in a clear manner” and that it “Ensures that every student across the university gets equal investment.”

UWE Students’ Union Vice President, Gail Wilson, highlighted the importance of uniform allocation of resources. “The Students’ Union has been involved in the discussions
around the workload model and supports the principles of equality, fairness and standardisation that the model is built on. Currently students studying the same amount of credits and paying the same in fees can have wildly different experiences in terms of teaching and contact time across different areas of the institution which we feel is unfair.”

What are the prospects for the coming academic year and implications for students? Keith Hicks, Head of Marketing & Communication at UWE, maintains that throughout the dispute and negotiations that UWE management “Want to protect contact hours with students in the face of cuts in the higher education sector. The university puts student experience as its top priority - unlike other universities.”

This was reiterated by Assistant Vice-Chancellor, Richard O’Doherty, who stated that “As a university we have made the student experience our number one priority. This initiative is precisely to protect what we regard as important.”

Strain placed upon the university by cuts in the higher education sector as a whole seems to be one of the driving factors for the new model. Efficiency and by association the ability of UWE to function as a financially solvent institution, while not being zero sum in relation to the student experience, are essentially the bottom line.

John Rushforth told the Western Eye that, in the event of H.E. sector cuts, UWE “Cannot give a guarantee that teaching time will not be cut or redundancies made, but will do our best to avoid it if at all possible (e.g. raise income from other sources, make efficiencies in admin and so on).”

Does this mean that, even if a solution to the workload model that is acceptable to both UWE management and UCU members is found, teaching time could still be cut and class sizes increased? It would seem so.

Any emergency budget brought in by the new Conservative – Liberal Democrat coalition government could certainly have implications for the higher education sector. John Rushforth agreed that “This could even affect our grant allocation.”

Regardless of the effectiveness and efficiency of any new model, it might not prove ‘efficient’ enough if the government decides to put the squeeze on higher education, beyond the 20% cuts already stipulated by the Brown administration. While not being an exactly dire situation, unrest within the university combined with a government needing to squeeze every penny it can out of public spending does not bode well for UWE students.

As far as staff industrial action in the new academic year goes, John Rushforth reiterated that “We will do all we can to avoid it, if unfortunately it did come
to that we would do everything we had to to protect the student experience.”

(This article is not for reprint or redistribution via ANY media or method without the express permission of the author - contact details are included)