Branch held a General Meeting at 12:30-2pm on Tuesday 14th October 2025. The President gave a brief local update, covering matters including our Strategy Day, academic year changes, lecture capture, workload and management culture, and the need to increase membership and stay engaged. We then moved on to the formal business outlined below.

Policies and Procedures

The University is intending to ask the branch to ratify three policies at the forthcoming JJNC meeting on 16th October. Members instructed the branch executive as follows:

• To ratify the University’s proposed new Consultancy Policy: for 37; against 0, abstain 3.
• To ratify the University’s proposed new Overseas Working Policy: for 35, against 0; abstain 3; on the understanding that late amendments discussed with the University are accepted.
• To ratify changes to the University’s Additional Holiday Policy: for 35; against 0; abstain 3; on the condition that the University agrees to enter discussions regarding practices relating to the carryover of annual leave.

Motion: Unite UCU Dispute

Branch notes:

1. The ongoing dispute between UCU management and the Unite UCU branch.
2. That Unite UCU members working from home as part of Action Short of Strike (ASOS) have been threatened with punitive pay deductions.
3. That members of this branch were subject to disproportionate pay deductions for participating in UCU’s 2023 Marking and Assessment Boycott as part of ASOS.

Branch believes:

1. Negotiations between UCU management and Unite UCU should resume immediately, so that the dispute can be resolved as soon as possible.
2. That employers, least of all trade unions, should not make disproportionate or punitive pay deductions from staff participating in industrial action.

Branch resolves:

1. To call on the General Secretary and UCU management to enter negotiations with Unite UCU, without preconditions.
2. To call on the General Secretary and UCU management to stop the threat of punitive pay deductions for taking part in ASOS.
3. To make a donation of £100 to the Unite UCU strike fund, should UCU staff participating in ASOS be subject to disproportionate or punitive pay deductions.

For: 35
Against: 0
Abstain: 3

Motion Carried

AOB: Co-Option to the Executive Committee

Branch voted unanimously in favour of the co-option of Dr Sofia Doyle to the position of Branch Equality Officer. We are pleased to report that this means that all officer positions are now filled for 2025-26.

The University and University and College Union have released the following joint statement:

The University of Southampton and the University and College Union (UCU) have engaged in constructive discussions to address concerns raised by UCU regarding the implementation of the Modernising the Governance project and its impact on employment procedures and academic freedom, and marking and assessment boycott (MAB) related grievances. Both parties are committed to working collaboratively to find mutually acceptable resolutions that uphold the principles of fairness, transparency, and academic excellence within the University.

Key Areas of Proposed Joint Work:

• Academic Freedom: The University and UCU acknowledge the importance of academic freedom. We have jointly reviewed the draft Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom and have incorporated a reference to the relevant UNESCO recommendations into 3.1.9 and included a clause in 1.6 regarding the University’s commitment to consult with the Trade Unions on any amendments to the Code. This led the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) held on 22 May 2025 to endorse the final draft submitted to Senate for approval. Furthermore, we will examine employment procedures to identify potential enhancements to the protection of academic freedom, including the role of Academic Senators.
• Levels of Authority in Employment Procedures: The University and UCU recognise the importance of ensuring fair and efficient decision-making in employment procedures. We will jointly review the levels of authority for key procedures, including non-confirmation of probation, and redundancy (including the end of a fixed-term contract). The role and principles of independent decision-making in appeal processes will also be a focus of our joint review.
• Council Oversight of Employment Procedures: The University and UCU acknowledge the importance of appropriate oversight of employment procedures. We will work together to ensure that the reporting mechanisms to Council are robust and transparent, including exploring the content and frequency of these reports and the potential for discussion at the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC).
• Trade Union Advice and Timely Procedures: The University reaffirms its commitment to ensuring employees have sufficient time to access trade union advice during employment procedures. We will jointly document the established practices for escalating concerns regarding delays in obtaining representation. Furthermore, both parties are committed to the timely conclusion of employment procedures and will work together during the implementation review to monitor and identify areas for improvement in procedural timescales.
• Marking and Assessment Boycott (MAB) Grievances: While the University and UCU have maintained their respective positions in relation to the MAB related grievances, both parties have engaged in meaningful and constructive dialogue over the concerns raised by UCU. A Dispute Resolution Procedure was agreed between the University and campus trade unions at the Joint Joint Negotiating Committee (JJNC) meeting on 28 November 2024. Both parties have also agreed to jointly define and map out the distinctions between disputes, individual grievances, and collective grievances as a positive next step to provide a clear way of addressing similar issues moving forward. Following this, we will review Section 1.8 of the University’s Grievance Procedure to ensure clarity and address the handling of individual and collective grievances, including the principle of individual consent for collective processes. Both parties have agreed to keep a separate Collective Grievance Procedure under consideration, with the requirement for such a procedure being determined as part of the ongoing discussions.

Next Steps and Indicative Timeline:

The University proposes the following indicative timeline for addressing the identified concerns:

• June – August 2025: The University will undertake internal work over the summer period to review the identified key areas, develop preliminary proposals, and map out potential solutions based on the discussions held.
• September 2025 (Start of New Academic Year): The University will aim to share these preliminary proposals and mappings with UCU representatives for initial discussion and feedback at the start of the new academic year.
• October – November 2025: Based on the feedback received, the University will refine the proposals and aim to reach mutually agreeable positions with UCU representatives. Draft statements or proposed revisions will be developed and shared for formal agreement.
• Winter 2025/2026 (in parallel with the broader Implementation Review): Final agreed statements and revisions will be prepared for wider communication and, where applicable, integration into University policies and procedures. Importantly, as part of the broader Implementation Review of employment procedures, the University will also engage in discussions with Unite and Unison regarding any proposed changes.
• New Year 2026 Onwards: Any resulting changes to University policies and procedures will then be subject to the appropriate University governance approval processes. We will keep UCU informed of the progress through these governance structures.

We are committed to keeping our respective memberships informed of the progress of this joint work.

Looking Ahead:

Both the University and UCU are committed to a positive and productive working relationship. By addressing these concerns collaboratively, we aim to strengthen the University’s employment practices and uphold the principles of academic freedom for the benefit of all staff and the institution as a whole.

[Statement released 24/7/2025]

Our 2025 Annual General Meeting took place on 19 June, 12:30-2pm, and included reports from the President and several Branch Officers, as well as a talk by guest speaker, Dr Zara Dinnen (QMUL UCU Branch), about the prospect of opening a trade dispute with the Secretary of State for Education. The Branch Executive Committee for 2025-26 was announced, and several decisions were taken, as set out below.

Thank you to everyone who came, and to Laura, our Branch Organiser and Administrator, for organising the meeting.

Branch Executive Committee 2025-26

• President – David Bretherton
• Vice President – Hannah Fair
• Honorary Secretary – Eleanor Jones
• Honorary Treasurer – Mary Morrison
• Communications Officer – Rachel Corbett
• Membership & Campaigns Officer – Claire Le Foll
• Officer for Members of Colour – Shmma Quraishe
• Academic-Related Staff Officer – Thom Bostock
• Pensions Officer – Traute Meyer
• Post-Graduate & SUSU Liaison Officer – Michael Barnard
• Environmental Officer – Vesna Perisic
• Ordinary Member – Patrick McSweeney
• Ordinary Member – Holly-Gale Millette
• NEC South Rep – Denis Nicole

We currently have vacancies on the committee for an Insecure Contracts Staff Officer, Equality Officer, Health & Safety Officer, and two further Ordinary Members – please get in touch if you are interested in taking on one of these roles!

Thank you to outgoing committee members Charlie Ellis, Graham Van Goffrier, Tsvetelina Hristova, John Langley and Becki Nash for their service.

Changes to Local Subscription Rates

Branch discussed a proposal to change local subscription rates from 1 September 2025 to protect the financial position of the branch and to reduce the cost of UCU membership for our lowest-paid members. The proposal was approved, with members voting as set out below. The new rates were confirmed in our Friday email to members of 20 June 2025.

For: 36
Against: 0
Abstain: 4
Proposal carried.

Local Disputes Update

Members were updated on work to resolve our two local disputes. Members were presented with a proposed joint statement (prepared by the University and UCU), and were invited to approve it and to suspend the disputes, so that progress could continue, as set out in the timetable in the joint statement. We voted on the two disputes (and associated sections of the joint statement) separately, as follows:

Do you accept the statement (bullet points 1-4) and wish to suspend the Modernising the Governance dispute?

For: 35
Against: 0
Abstain: 1
Proposal carried.

Do you accept the statement (bullet point 5) and wish to suspend the MAB-related grievances dispute?

For: 27
Against: 0
Abstain: 7
Proposal carried.

Motions Passed

1. Solidarity with Unite Southampton University Branch

Branch notes the ongoing dispute between the University of Southampton and the Unite Southampton University Branch over proposed changes to terms and conditions of staff in Engineering and Infrastructure (part of Estates and Facilities). Branch expresses its solidarity with Unite members, encourages the university to reach a negotiated resolution with Unite, and authorises the Executive Committee to make a payment of up to £300 to the Unite branch’s local strike fund, should their members take industrial action.

For: 35
Against: 0
Abstain: 0
Motion carried unanimously.

2. Donations to Palestinian Causes

Southampton UCU Branch resolves:

1. To donate £300 from branch funds to the Friends of Birzeit University (https://fobzu.org/donate/), and to invite members to consider making a personal donation if they can afford to do so.
2. To donate £300 from branch funds to Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) (https://www.map.org.uk/), and to invite members to consider making a personal donation if they can afford to do so.

For: 35
Against: 0
Abstain: 1
Motion carried.

3. Solidarity with Harvard University and other US Universities

Branch regrets that there was insufficient time to debate Congress 2025 motion L4 ‘Condemn Trump’s assault on free speech and academic freedom at Harvard University and other US universities’; it was remitted to the NEC. We believe that, if debated, the motion would have received wide support and call on the NEC to implement its resolutions.

For: 34
Against: 0
Abstain: 2
Motion carried.

4. 2025 HESC Motion HE14 and Secretary of State Dispute

Branch notes:

1. HE14 ‘Trade union dispute with Secretary of State for Education over funding’ overwhelmingly passed at the UCU Higher Education Sector conference.
2. HE14 included a reference to legal advice that shows the viability of a trade dispute with the Secretary of State over the funding of HE.
3. HE14 resolves to open a trade dispute with the Secretary of State for Education over HE funding; to coordinate with other HE unions and students to build wide support for the dispute; and to campaign to build awareness and support for the dispute, highlighting the direct link between sector funding, employment conditions and student experience.

Branch believes:

1. HE14 was successful because it is the result of a long-term, democratic, rank-and-file campaign organised by workers in higher education.
2. In order to make HE14 a reality in the union, rank-and-file members need to continue campaigning.
3. A well-organised dispute at the national level is necessary to challenge the systemic erosion of working conditions across the sector.
4. Collective action from all university unions is required to compel the government to reform the funding model.

Branch resolves:

1. To organise an open general meeting with other campus unions to discuss HE14 and the strategy next term.
2. To contact the local student union and other student groups to discuss the campaign and funding model.
3. To contact the local MP to discuss the dispute, calling on them to raise the issue with the Secretary of State for Education.
4. To contact the local press to discuss the dispute and the impact on the local community of cuts and redundancies.
5. To call on the UCU general secretary to work with other higher education unions to establish a democratic ‘Higher Education Workers Conference’ to plan the next steps in the dispute.
6. To write to HEC to ask for regular updates on opening a trade dispute with the Secretary of State for Education over HE funding.

For: 32
Against: 0
Abstain: 3
Motion carried.

We are UCU, Unite and UNISON local branch lay officers and representatives who support union members at all levels and in all areas of the University of Southampton.

We unequivocally support the rights of trans, non-binary, intersex and gender-nonconforming people, and believe that the best way to protect everyone’s rights is to protect everyone’s rights: an injury to one is an injury to all. We support the right to self-identification, and we support full inclusion in the workplace. We reject the divisive notion that trans rights and women’s rights are in conflict – rather, as is increasingly clear from events in other countries, we rise or fall together. The Supreme Court Judgment in For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers (16 April 2025), concerning the definition of ‘sex’ in the Equality Act 2010, reaffirmed trans people’s rights to protection from discrimination and harassment, but also threatens the broader rights, dignity and inclusion of trans, non-binary, intersex and gender-nonconforming people. We are dismayed that the UK Government appears to be prepared to allow this erosion of rights, rather than to legislate to avoid it.

In 2015, ILGA-Europe (the European region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association) ranked the UK 1st in Europe for LGBTQ+ rights, with a score of 86.00%; in the most recent ranking, released 14 May 2025, the UK now stands at 22nd place, with a score of just 45.65%. This steep decline in LGBTQ+ rights in the UK should be a source of great national shame.

For many years, trade unions have been at the forefront of the fight for LGBTQ+ rights in employment and wider society, and we will be advocating within our unions for this to continue and intensify. Further, we call on the senior leadership of the University of Southampton to continue to do as much as possible (within the law, including considering legal action and lobbying for changes to the law) to protect trans, non-binary, intersex and gender-nonconforming staff and students, to limit as far as possible any detrimental action taken to comply with guidance that emerges following the Supreme Court Judgment, to mitigate any negative impacts, and to consult fully with trade unions, the Southampton University Students’ Union, and LGBTQ+ staff and student groups before taking any action. Finally, there should be no changes to provisions or practices until the Equality Act 2010 Statutory Codes of Practice have been updated and approved by Parliament, and full consideration must be given to other key legislation, such as the Workplace (Health, Safety and Welfare) Regulations 1992, the Gender Recognition Act 2004, and the Data Protection Act 2018.

If any union member requires support for these issues, or any other matter, please get in touch with your branch in the usual way.

University of Southampton UCU Branch Executive Committee
Unite Southampton University Branch Committee
UNISON Southampton District Branch, University of Southampton Executive Committee

Our e-consultation on the University’s ‘Transforming the Academic Year’ project opened late on 15 May and closed at 12 noon on 21 May.

The University is considering three options, which members were asked to rank in order of preference:

• Option 1: No changes to the academic year, but workload peaks will be addressed ‘through changes to process, practices, systems and behaviours’.
• Option 2a: 12-week teaching semesters retained, but earlier start to the academic year, shorter Easter ‘break’, and the addition of an intensive marking week for staff/short break for students between Semester 1 and Semester 2.
• Option 2b: Number of Semester 1 and Semester 2 teaching weeks reduced to 11, shorter Easter ‘break’, and the addition of an intensive marking week for staff/short break for students between Semester 1 and Semester 2.

We received 76 responses, which, while low, exceeds the quoracy requirements for branch votes. The results were as follows:

Option 2b is therefore the preferred option of those members that voted, securing an absolute majority of all 1st-preference votes. Option 2a was the least-favoured option, with fewest 1st-preference and most 3rd-preference votes.

Thank you to everyone who took part, and thank you to the Regional Office for organising the vote at short notice.

We held a General Meeting at 1-2pm on Thursday 15th May 2025. The Branch President gave a brief local update, which included welcoming the new Branch Administrator and Organiser, Laura O’Brien, summarising the information shared with us so far about the NousCubane benchmarking exercise the University recently undertook, and reporting on the progress of negotiations in our two local disputes. We then moved on to the formal business outlined below.

Review of the Academic Year

The University is consulting on possible changes to the academic year (details here). We discussed the various proposals, and took an informal indicative vote, which revealed that a majority of members present favoured Option 2b. As we discussed in the meeting, the branch will hold a formal e-consultation of members, to ensure that as many as possible have a say. Note that the results of this e-consultation will supersede the informal indicative vote held in today’s meeting, which was intended as a ‘backup’ in case the e-consultation could not be launched in time.

UPDATE: The e-consultation has now launched and will remain open until 12 noon on Wednesday 21st May – check your MyUCU-registered contact email for a message from ‘yoursay@ucu.org.uk’. In this consultation, you will be asked to rate the three options (1, 2a and 2b) in order of preference, from 1, for your preferred option, to 3, for your least preferred option.

Policies and Procedures

The University is intending to ask the branch to ratify three policies and procedures at the forthcoming JJNC and UCU JNC meetings on 22nd May. Members instructed the branch executive as follows:

• To approve the University’s proposed new Volunteering Leave Policy (for 35, against 0, abstain 4).
• To approve the University’s proposed new Student Complaints and Employee Disciplinary Interaction Process (for 33, against 0, abstain 7). This process, and associated changes to Regulations Governing Student Complaints, directly responds to concerns raised by the branch – see Motion 2 from our GM of 19th November 2024).
• To approve the University’s revised Code of Practice on Freedom of Speech and Academic Freedom (for 11, against 2, abstain 25).

2025 UCU Congress/Sector Conference Motions

We discussed the Second Report of the Congress Business Committee, which contains motions that are expected to be voted on at UCU Congress/Sector Conference, 24th-26th May 2025. The Executive Committee highlighted Motions 52 (p. 31), 72 (p. 41), HE6 (p. 66) and HE14 (p. 70) as ones that members may have views on. If you have opinions on any motion that you would like to share with the voting delegates who will be representing us at Congress, please send them to ucu@soton.ac.uk by no later than 9am on 22nd May, so that we have time to pass them on.

Motions

The following motion was overwhelmingly passed by members.

Motion: Southampton UCU’s Commitment to Trans Rights

The branch notes:

• That the UK Supreme Court ruling from 16 April declares sex in the Equality Act 2010 refers to sex assigned at birth.
• That the Equality and Human Rights Commission issued guidance on 25 April that states people must use single-sex spaces according to sex assigned at birth, reflecting earlier comments by the Secretary of State for Education and Minister for Women and Equalities, Bridget Phillipson.
• That the EHRC guidance has no provision for intersex people, and is worded such that trans people could be excluded from single-sex facilities altogether.

The branch believes that the interim guidance:

• Undermines the basic human rights and dignity of trans, intersex, non-binary and gender non-conforming staff and students, including their right to privacy and to be free of harassment and discrimination.
• Contradicts current policy and practice at most post-16 institutions, including UoS, which allow all staff and students to use the gendered spaces appropriate to them (see the branch-ratified Inclusion and Respectful Behaviour policy).
• Encourages enforcement that would amount to harassment, given that a person’s sex assigned at birth and/or transition status are confidential medical information.
• Also threatens dignity at work for cis people, particularly cis women, due to its reliance on subjective assessments of gender presentation.

The branch resolves to:

• Call on the University of Southampton to maintain its existing, trans-inclusive Inclusion and Respectful Behaviour policy and to reiterate this policy to all staff and students.
• Ensure that we are consulted on any changes to policy, in line with our recognition agreement.
• Call on members to vote against ratifying any changes to policy that might weaken or dilute trans people’s right to use single-sex spaces that align with their gender identity.

For: 31
Against: 2
Abstain: 4

Motion carried.

During November and December 2024, we invited local UCU members to complete an online survey to give the branch feedback on their concerns and priorities, and what we could do to increase engagement. You can find a report on the results below (embedded document and download link), which also includes some of the actions that we have taken/will be taking in response. Thank you to everyone who took time to complete the survey.

Loading...

Taking too long?

Reload document

| Open in new tab

Download [140.44 KB]

We held a General Meeting at 1-2pm on 11th February 2025. After the approval of the minutes of the 19th November 2024 General Meeting and 17th December 2024 Extraordinary General Meeting, and local update from the Branch President, the following business was conducted.

University Policies, Procedures and Proposals

• By general consensus, members approved minor changes to the previously ratified Career Pathways.
• Branch gave further instruction to the Executive Committee with respect to the Whistleblowing Policy.
• Branch gave instructions to the Executive Committee with respect to the proposed changes to Engineering & Infrastructure terms and conditions.

Motions

Branch passed the following motions.

Motion 1: Solidarity with HE and FE Branches

Branch expresses its deep concern at the growing number of job losses being announced at universities and colleges across the country, and expresses its solidarity with all trade union members who are facing redundancy, pay cuts and detrimental changes to their terms and conditions.

Branch resolves:

1. To instruct the Branch Executive Committee to write, on behalf of members, to Southampton’s three MPs, to express our concern about the situation, and to ask them to do all they can to advocate for improved HE and FE funding, to protect both the global reputation of UK education and the jobs of hard-working university and college staff.
2. To instruct the Branch Executive Committee to write to the Vice-Chancellor and Chair of Council, calling on UEB and Council to continue to do all in their power to protect the jobs of staff at the University of Southampton and beyond.
3. To authorise the Branch Executive Committee to make payments from the Branch’s general funds to the strike funds of UCU branches who take industrial action to protect their members, at the discretion of the Executive Committee, but prioritising branches in the Southern Region, up to a total of £1,000.

For: 47
Against: 0
Abstain: 2

Motion carried.

Motion 2: Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism

Branch notes:

1. The adoption of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) Working Definition of Antisemitism by the University of Southampton on 11 November 2020, following intense pressure placed on universities by then Education Secretary, Gavin Williamson.
2. That the 2021 Annual Congress expressed concerns, and resolved (‘f’ and ‘g’) to call on branches to press for the adoption of the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism (JDA) ‘as an alternative or supplement to’ the IHRA Working Definition.
3. The request of this branch’s negotiators, at an E-JJNC meeting with management on 23 July 2024, that the University of Southampton adopts the JDA.

Branch believes:

1. That antisemitism and Islamophobia are unacceptable and should be challenged.
2. That the JDA is a valuable resource for defining and combatting antisemitism.

Branch resolves:

1. To call on the University of Southampton to adopt immediately the JDA Definition of antisemitism, as an alternative or supplement to the IHRA Definition.

For: 42
Against: 2
Abstain: 5

Motion carried.

Motion 3: Israeli Arms Divestment Letter to USS

Branch notes:

• Resolves 1(c) in the motion passed by members on 10 May 2024.
• That the national position of UCU is to press for the USS pension scheme to fully divest from holdings directly or indirectly linked to Israeli’s military actions or occupation (most recently expressed in Motion 33, resolves iv, first bullet, at the 2024 Annual Congress).

Branch resolves:

• To instruct the Branch President to write to the Chair of the USS Trustee Board, to call on USS to fully divest from holdings directly or indirectly linked to Israel’s military actions or occupation.

[A draft letter was shared at the meeting, and is being revised in light of feedback received.]

For: 26
Against: 9 
Abstain: 10

Motion carried.

We held a General Meeting at 1-2pm on 19th November 2024. After the approval of previous minutes and a local update from the Branch President, the following business was considered.

Policies and Procedures

We discussed a number of proposed University policies/procedures that the branch will be asked to ratify at the forthcoming JJNC and JNC meetings with management on 28th November. Members voted as follows:

• To approve the proposed Dispute Resolution Procedure. For: 58. Against: 0. Abstain: 2. Carried.
• To authorise the Executive Committee to take a decision on the proposed Career Pathways, pending further clarification from the University. For: 49. Against: 0. Abstain: 5. Carried.*
• To approve the proposed Whistleblowing Policy. For: 2. Against: 49. Abstain: 0. Failed. 
• To approve the proposed Sabbatical Policy. For: 10. Against: 8. Abstain: 35. Carried.** 
• To approve the proposed Flexible Working Policy. For: 52. Against: 0. Abstain: 1. Carried. 

* Since the GM, the University has confirmed that the ‘placeholder text’ in some of the TAE sections will be removed, and the trade unions will be consulted if further amendments are needed.

** Following the GM, the Exec. has secured the requested reassurance that an unsuccessful sabbatical application does not reset the clock on eligibility to apply, and the policy wording has been modified to make this explicit. Further, we have secured a strengthening of the wording (‘may’ changed to ‘should’) in Section 9.1. of the policy, relating to disrupted sabbaticals.

Branch Rule Change and Changes to the Executive Committee

Members voted in favour of a local rule change to rename the ‘Black Members’ Officer’ to ‘Officer for Members of Colour’, proposed by Shmma Quraishe. This proposal passed by the required 2/3 majority, with 52 votes in favour, 0 votes against, and 4 abstentions. This change now needs to be approved by UCU headquarters.

Working on the assumption that the rule change will be accepted, branch voted overwhelmingly to co-opt Shmma Quraishe to the position of Officer for Members of Colour, and Hannah Fair to the Ordinary Member position vacated by Shmma. (These co-options will be confirmed once we know that the rule change has been accepted by UCU headquarters.)

Motions

Members voted on the two motions given below, which were tabled by the Branch Executive Committee. Both motions passed overwhelmingly, and will now be raised at the forthcoming JJNC and JNC meetings with management on 28th November.

1. Ban New Staff-Student Sexual and Romantic Relationships

Branch notes:

• The proposals from the OfS on regulating harassment and sexual misconduct in England; and
• Research showing that most students – particularly women – are not comfortable with romantic and sexual staff-student relationships.

Branch believes:

• That UCU should support policy-making that will prevent abuses of power by higher education staff; and
• That an evidence-based approach to preventing sexual misconduct reasonably involves action on regulating staff-student sexual and romantic relationships, as well as establishing professional boundaries more widely.

Branch resolves:

• To call for a ban of the formation of new sexual and romantic relationships between staff and students, where there is a teaching, assessment or pastoral component to that relationship.

For: 42
Against: 1
Abstentions: 7 

Motion carried.

2. Handling of Student Complaints of Staff Misconduct

Branch notes:

1. That at the University of Southampton, complaints raised by students about staff misconduct are considered under the Student Complaints Policy (s. 3.1c). Outcomes are reported to the student, and any ‘upheld’ complaints may be referred to the staff Disciplinary Procedure for further action.
2. That the OIAHE’s ‘Good Practice Framework’ instead recommends that ‘a complaint about alleged misconduct of a member of staff […] should normally be handled under an HR procedure’ (s. 125), that it should be ‘referred [at the outset] to the provider’s staff disciplinary process’, and that ‘[t]he outcome of the process will normally be confidential to the staff member’ (Disciplinary Procedures, s. 108 and Case Study 8).
3. That staff are afforded important protections by the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, but that while these are incorporated into the Disciplinary Procedure, several key protections are absent from the Student Complaints Policy, including the respondent’s right to see and challenge evidence in a Hearing before a decision is taken, and the right of the respondent to appeal a decision.
4. That some student complaints about staff misconduct have been ‘upheld’ under the Student Complaints Policy, but subsequently ‘not upheld’ once the respondent had a meaningful opportunity to challenge evidence and present a defence in a Disciplinary Hearing. In such cases, there is no mechanism for the earlier decision to be rescinded.
5. That our 1973 recognition agreement commits the University to ‘consult and negotiate’ with us on matters relating to ‘conditions of service’, yet the Student Complaints Policy is not one on which we are typically consulted.

Branch believes:

1. That students have a right to complain about staff misconduct.
2. That student allegations of staff misconduct should be investigated in a manner that respects the rights afforded to staff by the Acas Code of Practice.
3. That student allegations of staff misconduct should be referred to the staff Disciplinary Procedure at the outset, and that outcomes should normally remain confidential to the member of staff, in accordance with the OIAHE’s recommendations.
4. That while some staff may find the title ‘Disciplinary Procedure’ more alarming than ‘Student Complaints Policy’, the former is nevertheless the most appropriate process to follow to ensure that their rights are protected when they are respondents to misconduct allegations.
5. That the referral of a student complaint to the staff Disciplinary Procedure should not automatically require an investigation or hearing, and that the University should avoid unnecessarily escalating complaints to the formal part of the Disciplinary Procedure.

Branch resolves:

1. To call on the University to enter negotiations with UCU on the handling of student complaints of staff misconduct.
2. To call on the University to implement the recommendations of the OIAHE ‘Good Practice Framework’ regarding complaints about staff misconduct.

For: 43
Against: 0
Abstentions: 2  

Motion carried.

Thank you to everyone who came.

[Post updated 27/11/2024]

Please find below the branch’s recent correspondence with the Vice-Chancellor regarding the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and motions that were passed at the Southampton UCU General Meeting – 12th March 2024 and the Emergency General Meeting – 10th May 2024 (reconvened).

Following receipt of the Vice-Chancellor’s reply, the branch executive has decided:

1. To add an appropriate agenda item to the next JJNC meeting between trade unions and management, and
2. That the Branch President will contact the Associate Vice-President EDI and Social Justice to request a meeting.

We will keep members updated.

Email from Southampton UCU President to the Vice-Chancellor, 10 June 2024.

Dear Vice-Chancellor,

Following discussions at the JJNC on 16 May, I write to advise you of various resolutions passed by the Southampton UCU Branch concerning the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

At a reconvened Emergency General Meeting on 10 May, and after considerable debate, the branch passed by a large majority a motion entitled ‘Declaration of the sanctity of education and life for all and a call for an immediate and permanent ceasefire (Ceasefire now and an end to “Educide”)’. This motion, which can be viewed at https://southampton.web.ucu.org.uk/2024/05/10/emergency-general-meeting-10th-may-2024-reconvened/ and is appended below, demands that the University of Southampton takes several actions, which can be found under resolution 1. UCU members are horrified by the events in Gaza and are looking to the University to act; I therefore request that the demands in resolution 1 are given your most serious consideration.

You may also be interested to know that, at a previous General Meeting of the Branch on 12 March, members resolved to authorise humanitarian donations to the charities Medical Aid for Palestinians (MAP) and Friends of Birzeit University (Fobzu). As a result of the latter donation, I have been invited to represent the Branch at a conference organised by Fobzu later this month, on the topic ‘Emergency Support for Palestinian Higher Education’. I will of course be sharing what I learn at that conference with local UCU members, but I would also be very pleased to share what I learn with you and UEB too.

Yours sincerely,
[Southampton UCU President]

[A copy of the motion was appended to the email]

Reply from the Vice-Chancellor to the Southampton UCU President, 19 June 2024

Dear [Southampton UCU President],

I have now had the opportunity to discuss with colleagues on the University Executive Board (UEB) the various issues raised in the resolutions recently passed by the UCU branch. Although the JJNC meetings should continue to be a forum for these discussions, I thought it might be helpful if I set out some general points in response.

I fully understand that this continues to be an incredibly difficult time for many in our community, some of whom I know have deep personal connections with the region. I am sure all of us share a continuing horror at the October 7^th attacks on Israel and the ensuing devastating impact of hostilities on all civilian populations, and the heart-breaking humanitarian crisis that has unfolded in Gaza. All of us on UEB fervently hope for a swift and lasting cessation of hostilities on all sides.

I also fully understand and respect the passionately-held views of many in our University community, some of which are reflected in the resolutions that were passed. Equally, I accept there will always be multiple, diverse points of view and no single ‘right’ answer’ on issues such as this, and that there is often a greater complexity and nuance than is found within the current media, social media and political commentary. Some in our community have contacted me direct to explain why they strongly disagree with the resolutions that were passed by the UCU branch. This illustrates the complexity for the University when there are such opposing views held by different people, as you of course will have experienced yourself, with clear differences of views amongst the small number of members who voted.

Having different views is of course, how it should be. Universities, of all places, should provide a safe forum in which our staff and students feel they can freely and respectfully express their lawful views, and feel they are seen, safe and supported. As I have said previously, freedom of speech and academic freedom are fundamental cornerstones of our institution, which I will ensure we will continue always to uphold, and which as a sector we must robustly defend.

I know too that many in our community continue to be concerned about the rise in Antisemitic and Islamophobic incidents seen in some areas. I repeat my pledge that we will ensure that all members of our community feel safe, and that we will not hesitate to take swift and decisive action against any threats to any members of our staff and student community.

As a University, we have to balance a number of obligations and responsibilities, which is not always easy, as we have seen elsewhere. We have to balance our legal requirement to be impartial with the expectations of some for us to take a more public position. We have to balance our obligations to uphold lawful freedom of speech and academic freedom with a recognition that some may fundamentally disagree with what’s said, and find it upsetting. Lawful freedom of speech does mean that some views can be expressed that others may strongly disagree with, or be offended by.

Above all, I am most anxious that at a time of heightened tensions and emotions, we as a very diverse community – with students from more than 170 countries, and staff from more than 90 countries – remain sensitive to and respectful of each other’s perspectives, and ensure that all members of our communities feel safe, supported and included. I am very grateful to [our Associate Vice-President EDI and Social Justice] who has been talking to a number of individuals and groups on these issues, to ensure the voices of our staff and students are heard, and to actively promote inclusive behaviours and protect freedom of speech.

Whilst I understand the views of those who question the continuation of some industry relationships, partnerships and investments, I have always believed passionately in universities taking an approach of influence and change through positive engagement, not isolation or retreat, and ensuring academic freedom around research collaborations, unless prohibited by the UK Government.

I am confident that after many years of strong leadership and careful thought we have robust ethical frameworks and governance around all our decision-making relating to research partnerships, the acceptance of gifts, and our investments, and that these align with our core values as an institution. Nevertheless, universities do not exist in a bubble and to be truly values-driven our work must always be alive to real-world issues and heightened ethical concerns, and so it is of course right that we regularly review these, in discussion with our community. So, we are currently in the process of reviewing our Responsible Partnerships Statement, which sets out the principles we adopt around our research partnerships; and we have relatively recently reviewed our Gift Acceptance and Naming Policy governing our philanthropic activity across the University. Our University investment policy is governed by an Investment Committee, as an advisory committee reporting to our Council, and again this is an area we are continuing to review and reflect on.

Finally, we take our responsibilities as a Civic University very seriously, not just in respect of our place in our region, but also in respect of our place and responsibilities in the global community as a world top 100 university. We are acutely conscious of the impact on academic institutions, their staff and students, from global conflict, and I was very pleased to support our application to become a University of Sanctuary, and earlier this month I was delighted to meet and talk with the accreditation team assessing our application. I was also very pleased to see us launch two new annual Sanctuary scholarships to support UG and PGT students, and we are now actively considering doubling our support in the future, so more students from conflict areas can be supported.

I continue to be heartened that we as an inclusive community are embodying the values and behaviours that unite us, and not divide us.

With best wishes,
[Vice-Chancellor]