Since February 2024, staff at QMUL have been called into ‘town halls’, invited to apply for Voluntary Severance, urged to come up with new programme proposals, roped in on ‘work streams’, etc. All of this frantic busy-ness amounts to a reorganisation of how we work as a university, yet senior management has refused to call this a reorganisation and refused to engage in meaningful consultation with the recognised trade unions. 

The principles of collective bargaining and the role of meaningful engagement are not just a piece of paper: they are key in negotiating a fair and reasonable outcome for all staff at QMUL. The joint campus unions wrote to the Senior Executive Team to remind them of the Reorganisation, Redundancy, and Redeployment Policy, and highlight the instances where their actions have been in breach of that policy.

  1. The policy 
  2. Material breaches of the policy

The policy 

Not only has the University refused to engage in consultation with the recognised trade unions about the HSS Reorganisation, it has already actively taken steps to implement this reorganisation. This is a clear violation of the Reorganisation, Redundancy, and Redeployment Policy.

Early and meaningful consultation (Section 2 of the Reorganisation, Redundancy, and Redeployment Policy)

2.1 QMUL recognises the benefits of early and meaningful consultation with the recognised Trade Unions, and a standing sub-committee of the Joint Consultative Forum (JCF) has been established for this purpose (Appendix A). Regular meetings of the Sub-Committee will be scheduled throughout the year to identify any potential future problems regarding funding and organisation issues affecting the institution, with the specific intent of seeking to avoid redundancies and to mitigate the potential effects on staffing levels generally. QMUL agrees to disclosure of all information necessary to enable an informed dialogue. 

2.2 For the avoidance of doubt, it should be noted that the beginning of formal consultation will commence at the earliest when one working week has elapsed after the end of the JCF Sub-Committee consideration of the proposals.

The purpose of the JCF (Appendix A of the policy)

keep all parties informed of any potential future problems regarding funding and organisation issues affecting the institution, with the specific intent of seeking to mitigate the potential effects on staffing levels;

‘Significant change’ (section 5 of the policy):

5.1 The following stages will be followed where it is considered necessary to restructure a Faculty/School/Institute/ Department/Team/Section, or where proposed changes are likely to impact substantially on the roles or jobs of groups of staff, or where staff may be at risk of redundancy. QMUL is committed to avoiding compulsory redundancies wherever possible. […]

5.3   Where QMUL is proposing significant organisational change it will prepare a consultation paper which will be submitted to the JCF Sub-Committee on change management and job conservation. QMUL managers will seek as far as possible, where this is appropriate and feasible in timescales for change, to undertake informal consultation with staff and/or their recognised Trade Union representatives before producing the consultation paper.

Material breaches of the policy

Instead of following the above provisions of the policy, a number of material breaches have occurred:

  • Prior to the launch of the HSS Reorganisation on 7th February, no informal consultation with the recognised trade unions was sought to identify future potential problems, to avoid potential redundancies, or to mitigate the potential effects on staff generally. 
  • When the trade unions tabled an item on the 26th February JCF agenda regarding the HSS Reorganisation, the item was removed by the chair.
  • The JCF subcommittee meeting on the VS scheme took place only two days before the official launch of the scheme, and after it had already been verbally announced by the Vice Principal in several staff meetings. The University had decided to reduce staff headcount via VS, which will have substantial impact on the roles or jobs of groups of staff (as these roles will not be replaced) without any formal or informal consultation. 
  • In multiple staff meetings throughout February and March, the Vice Principal announced that SED and SLLF will merge before any such proposal had been discussed with the recognised trade unions.
  • On 20th March, a discussion document was circulated to all staff in SED and SLLF which proposes a merger of the two Schools before any such proposal had been shared with the recognised trade unions.
  • The current SED HoS post will be terminated at the end of June. Under normal circumstances the process to appoint a new Head would have begun in Autumn 2023. This process was started, and a consultation with staff in SED on the new HoS was opened, but it was then stopped without explanation. SED has been notified it will not have a new HoS and from the end of June the proposal for the management structure of a new school, outlined in the discussion document, will be in effect.
  • Staff in both Schools have been allocated to working groups to develop new academic programmes for a future merged School, with the first documentation due by December 2024. These working groups are meeting weekly to prepare and implement the new programmes.
  • Staff in these working groups have also been sent a timeline which indicates that a new merged School will be fully operational by 1st September 2024. 
  • While the timeline identifies dates for Senate and Council to approve the plans for a merged School, no window for formal consultation with staff or trade unions is identified.
  • Faculty discussion documents have proposed a set of unified assumptions for School-based academic workload allocation models in HSS. These assumptions have not been discussed or even formally disclosed to UCU.