We have sent the below to SLT as a response tho their continued refusal to negotiate with UCU locally in respect of the MAB.

Dear colleagues

We are disappointed that you are still unwilling to enter into negotiations with us regarding the ongoing marking and assessment boycott. 

This position leaves us in a significant minority of UK institutions, and one of only a very small number of Welsh institutions. Additionally, your proposal to continue the deductions indefinitely ranks us among the worst institutions in the UK in terms of the total scale of deductions, and runs contrary to your stated position that you value good relations with campus trade unions. We are sure you agree that this does not reflect well on the reputation of the University, and are surprised that you are not taking steps to remedy this.

In the absence of any negotiations, we write to put you on notice that your proposed salary deductions are a breach of contract, and also constitute an unlawful interference with our members’ right to engage in lawful industrial action. 

We understand your position that you are rejecting partial performance. But, this is quite obviously a fiction.

Firstly, you have at no point advised colleagues participating in the MAB that they should not undertake their ordinary duties unless they also discontinue their participation in the MAB. This contradicts Government advice that “you must tell employees that they should only attend work if they fulfil their contractual duties”. Nor have you made it unambiguously clear to colleagues that any work done is on a purely voluntary basis (save for some particular comments to specific individuals). To the contrary, your correspondence on the matter of reporting expressly refers to the duty of obedience in contracts of employment, asserting colleagues participating in the MAB to remain bound thereby (your reply to our letter of 18th May does not address this point). Additionally, the University has continued to issue further instructions directly to individual colleagues after their participation in the MAB has become known.

Secondly, we note your threat to impose 100% deductions in the event of any escalations, such as the withdrawal of 100% of our labour. This, again, is clearly inconsistent with having rejected partial performance. If the payment of 50% is conditional upon our members continuing to perform 90-95% of their ordinary duties, then it is not, as you assert, an “ex gratia payment”, but rather, a salary deduction, which must be justified on some lawful grounds. 

Thirdly, the fact that you continue to deduct PAYE and NI from these payments indicates that they are not “ex gratia”: HMRC guidance confirms these payments to be subject to tax, by reason that they are conditional upon work being performed. This is inconsistent with your assertion that you have rejected partial performance.

Finally, we note your stated reasoning for imposing and maintaining the deductions that they are to “incentivise” colleagues to discontinue their participation in the MAB. That is to say, the deductions are (and are intended to be) punitive. As you are aware, it is unlawful to impose a detriment upon employees for their participation in lawful industrial action. Although you would be fully entitled to deduct a much smaller amount in respect of work not done, imposing disproportionate deductions amounts to an interference with our members’ legal right to freedom of association.

We note with interest your continuing assertion that your actions in this dispute are intended to mitigate the impact of industrial action on students. It is increasingly clear that the only way to achieve mitigation is to accept our offer and enter into local negotiations. 

The current approach of punitive deductions, a refusal to properly challenge bullying behaviour by some managers, and the imposition of regulations which devalue degrees and harm students has only served to deepen divisions. We have at all times shown willing to work with you to reduce the impact upon students, and are deeply disappointed at your failure to engage with these invitations.

We remain hopeful that you will work with us to settle the local dispute by calling on UCEA to return to negotiations, and by entering local negotiations to support our students.

We await your response.

Yours faithfully

UCU Committee