tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1 2007-09-23T15:12:49Z Movable Type 3.33 tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.14 2007-09-23T14:23:39Z 2007-09-23T15:12:49Z

All comments are in a personal capacity Philip Burgess, Dundee UCU and National Executive: The UCU Left leadership believes that “democracy by plebiscite is a fallacy.” They argue that the members are not well enough informed about Middle-East politics to...

All comments are in a personal capacity Philip Burgess, Dundee UCU and National Executive: The UCU Left leadership believes that “democracy by plebiscite is a fallacy.” They argue that the members are not well enough informed about Middle-East politics to merit a direct vote on the boycott. Nonsense. The right to insist on a ballot derives not from “expertise” or political commitment, but from the fact that the members ARE the union. The function of Executive and Congress is to serve the membership by improving salaries and conditions of service. We elect them for that, not to foist their political prejudices on us. If you want to know what the Union thinks; ask the members. Hold a ballot. Andrew Morgan, President, Swansea UCU and National Executive Staff join the Union to gain a measure of individual protection and to have an effective collective voice on employment issues. Where the Union departs from direct employment matters then there is, and must be, a democratic deficit – a deficit that can only be addressed through a direct consultation of the members. Members are owed a ballot on the issue of the Israeli Boycott. Dr John Fry, President, Liverpool UCU: Congress delegates and committee members are elected to represent members on UCU core issues, not foreign policy. For an “Israeli boycott” to become UCU policy or be struck from UCU business for the foreseeable future we therefore need a referendum of all members. Anything less will be divisive and will not be accepted by the membership Bob Mason, Branch Committee, Ulster UCU There is no clear division between "work" and "political" issues: both are central union functions. However, this a highly divisive issue and moreover one in which Congress mandated a national debate and information campaign. As UCU needs more member engagement, this is surely an issue on which a ballot is essential if we are to have a clear unified voice on the issue. Alex Arthur, Treasurer, Aberdeen UCU: There are many ways in which UCU members can, individually or through appropriate collectives, oppose the appalling treatement of the Palestinian population by the Israeli state machinery. Why do we need to use the UCU to do this? The boycott debate is damaging the Union's capacity to fulfil its central purpose. Its credibility and its decision making processes are both being undermined. This is doing constitutional damage, and the membership should be allowed to express an opinion. Tom Pike, Branch Committee, Imperial UCU: A boycott has to be a concerted, collective action, if it is to be effective. Otherwise it's empty, gesture politics. So whatever one's views on the boycott, a ballot of all the membership has to determine the way forward. A majority for a boycott would certainly cause anger and resignations for what would be a minority. But it would dispel at a stroke the feeling that those calling for a boycott were a group of unrepresentative and disruptive activists. If the vote was against a boycott it it would allow a pause for the UCU to refocus its energies on other pressing issues of immediate interest to UCU members. Of course UCU should not have to wait until the salary and conditions of its members are appropriate and assured before addressing any wider issues. But the membership are expending disproportionate efforts in discussing the proposed boycott. Meanwhile we disadvantage ourselves with our employers, and dissipate our energies in our own work. We need a ballot of the membership to bring the clarity of democracy to bear. ]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.11 2007-09-19T22:37:22Z 2007-09-23T13:22:22Z

Members of the UCU who want a direct say on the issue of an academic boycott of Israel will need to lobby those who are supposed to represent us on the NEC. You can find out who is on the...

here and you can see who represents your sector and your region. Some members of the NEC strongly favour a ballot. But those who stood on the slate of the "UCULeft" tend to oppose a ballot, preferring to decide on the issue at Congress, without members having a direct voice. Members who want a direct vote need to tell UCULeft to stop blocking a ballot.]]> say "we are strongly opposed to any attempts that might be made to peremptorily ‘resolve’ this issue which would involve bypassing UCU’s democratic structures or undermining properly-constituted decisions made at Annual Congress by branch delegates." UCU members will be able to work out what this means: UCU Left do not want a ballot of the whole membership - they want the matter to drag on until next Congress, or beyond. And then they want to exclude the vast majority of the memebrship of the union from any direct say. They want the often self-selecting delegates to that Congress to make the decision for the members.]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.10 2007-09-19T20:08:10Z 2007-09-25T19:03:26Z

LSHTM were quickest off the mark in consulting their members after Congress. In a ballot of local UCU members 89% backed the following statement: The London School of Hygiene believes that another full year of arguments about a potential boycott...

The London School of Hygiene believes that another full year of arguments about a potential boycott of Israeli academic institutions without a decision will be divisive and hence counter to the interests of the members of this union. We therefore call upon the NEC to ballot the full membership of UCU on the issue of whether or not to instigate a boycott as quickly as practicable, while still adhering to the instructions coming to NEC from motion 30 at the 2007 Congress. We believe we must trust the membership to decide what they want their union to do, with all due speed. We hope that other branches that will support this call. In the event of such a ballot we call on all branches to do their best to get a high turn out.]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.9 2007-09-19T20:05:03Z 2007-09-19T22:33:27Z

'In the light of the passing of Motion 30 at UCU Congress concerning a proposed boycott of Israeli academic institutions (see text of the motion below), the UCU executive "encourages branches to seek members views directly." Imperial College UCU (ICUCU)...

'In the light of the passing of Motion 30 at UCU Congress concerning a proposed boycott of Israeli academic institutions (see text of the motion below), the UCU executive "encourages branches to seek members views directly." Imperial College UCU (ICUCU) therefore conducted an email survey of the membership to guide our local position and convey the local opinion to the national leadership'. Results of the Survey: Question 1 (Do you support Motion 30?) Yes 16 % No 82 % No response 2 % Question 2 (Do you think that there should be a national ballot of membership before UCU adopts any international academic boycott?) Yes 90 % No 6 % No response 4 % Percentage of ICUCU members who voted: 14 % Motion 30 - Boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions (Composite between University of Brighton, Grand Parade; University of East London, Docklands; Amended by College of North East London) Congress notes that Israel's 40-year occupation has seriously damaged the fabric of Palestinian society through annexation, illegal settlement, collective punishment and restriction of movement. Congress deplores the denial of educational rights for Palestinians by invasions, closures, checkpoints, curfews, and shootings and arrests of teachers, lecturers and students. Congress condemns the complicity of Israeli academia in the occupation, which has provoked a call from Palestinian trade unions for a comprehensive and consistent international boycott of all Israeli academic institutions. Congress believes that in these circumstances passivity or neutrality is unacceptable and criticism of Israel cannot be construed as anti-semitic. Congress instructs the NEC to: circulate the full text of the Palestinian boycott call to all branches/LAs for information and discussion; encourage members to consider the moral implications of existing and proposed links with Israeli academic institutions; organise a UK-wide campus tour for Palestinian academic/educational trade unionists; issue guidance to members on appropriate forms of action actively encourage and support branches to create direct links with Palestinian educational institutions and to help set up nationally sponsored programmes for teacher exchanges, sabbatical placements, and research' ]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.5 2007-09-17T20:14:45Z 2007-09-23T16:02:30Z

Sally Hunt, the general secretary of our Union, ran on a platform promising a ballot before any boycott. You can read her statement here. After she won the General Secrataryship, UCU Congress backed the campaign for a boycott of Israel,...

here. After she won the General Secrataryship, UCU Congress backed the campaign for a boycott of Israel, circulating the call for a boycott to all branches. Why, then, hasn't there been a ballot on these proposals? ]]> Boycott clarification, Alan Carr, Published: 20 July 2007, THES Your report "No boycott vote till '08" (July 13) was not quite accurate. The University and College Union strategy and finance committee substantially approved a paper detailing plans to implement the congress decision to discuss a proposed academic boycott of Israel; however, it voted narrowly to delete (but not to reject) a recommendation to put the outcome of those discussions to a consultative ballot of members. This recommendation will need to be revisited. Members cannot be excluded from playing a full and equal part in the discussions and in the decision-making process that must follow. The UCU congress deserves the opportunity to take an informed final decision in the full knowledge of membership views. Alan Carr, Honorary treasurer, University and College Union So the people associated with UCU Left have already blocked proposals for an indicative ballot introduced by Sally Hunt to our union's Strategy and Finance Committee. They are planning to block a ballot on the National Executive Committee on the 30th November. ]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.8 2007-09-15T19:54:05Z 2007-09-23T13:48:55Z

Isn’t Congress the supreme policy making body of the Union? Yes, for all its weaknesses, Congress is the supreme policy making body of the union. The ballot that we want is an indicative one.. Congress ought to know what the...

Isn’t Congress the supreme policy making body of the Union? Yes, for all its weaknesses, Congress is the supreme policy making body of the union. The ballot that we want is an indicative one.. Congress ought to know what the members of the union think, and must be guided by that knowledge. Shouldn’t we hear the debates first, then decide? Yes, we should hear the debates. UCU is organising debates which are to be held in the first term.. UCU members should go to the debates. We are asking that the debates should be followed by an indicative ballot. The rationale for the debate is to inform members of the arguments for and against a boycott. By the end of October, the debates will have taken place: then the members should, based on the debates and other information, have a direct say. Are the members informed enough to make a decision? You’re not in UCU Left are you? Our members are the most highly informed, thoughtful union members in the country. They have a right to express their views, and make their voice heard. We think this is an elitist question, which runs counter to the democratic and member-led nature of the UCU. Don’t we need an active membership? We want members to take an active role in the union. We believe that many want to do so – and many want to have a direct vote particularly on the issue of a boycott. One way in which they and we want to be active is to help to determine the direction of the union, is by having a direct vote in a ballot on the boycott. Blocking a ballot stops people form taking an active role. And passing a boycott policy in the absence of a ballot would simply alienate members. What should be the question in this ballot? The debate is focussed on one question: Should the UCU adopt a boycott of Israeli academic institutions? In theory, worries about the question might matter, in practice, everyone knows what this is about. You are both anti-boycott. Isn’t this just a ruse to defeat it? It’s true that we both oppose a boycott, but this isn’t a ruse. Some supporters of the boycott also favour a ballot. They realise that a boycott without a democratic mandate will lack legitimacy. We agree with them. Either the members will support a boycott or not. The Union must let us, the members, decide. Wouldn’t a ballot be expensive? The current disruption to the normal working of the union is much more expensive than a simple ballot would be. And deciding on a policy without knowing the views of the members would be a catastrophic – and expensive – mistake, as hundreds of members tear up their union cards. ]]> tag:www.ucu-ballot.org,2007://1.6 2007-09-15T19:52:42Z 2007-09-22T07:25:06Z

We think UCU members are capable people, worthy of having a vote, and able to argue in branches for a vote. Memebrs should pass resolutions calling for a vote, and they should be sent in to the NEC. But if...

This Branch/LA of UCU recognises that the Israel/Palestine issue is one on which many members hold strong but often divergent views. In order to facilitate the maximum democratic participation on the decision on whether to have a boycott of Israeli Academic Institutions, this meeting calls on the NEC to organise a ballot of all members on the issue. The Union must carry out the actions mandated by Resolution 30, but move to a ballot as soon as possible after that.]]>