subtext | Truth: lies open to all

Issue 152 - “hard subtext”

27/10/2016

*****************************************************

Fortnightly during term time.

Letters, contributions, & comments: subtext-editors@lancaster.ac.uk

Back issues & subscription details: www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext

In this issue: editorial, ucea’s top bod, coventry, fees petition, boundary changes, he bill, protest on campus, cma, lu text vaulted claims, nus in antisemitism row, postgrad elections woes, memory loss, shart attack, music festival review, letters

*****************************************************

EDITORIAL

As noted in subtext’s last Senate report (subtext 151), reassuring staff about the fallout from the UK’s EU referendum vote was to be the VC’s first priority. Readers may be forgiven for thinking this might mean some sort of concrete action to reassure individuals who were worried, and perhaps to persuade staff to pause and give the UK a bit longer to get its ‘xit together while eyeing up job offers in countries that are firmly committed to remaining in the EU, and which haven't experienced a 500% increase in xenophobic hate incidents. That is, reassurances such as providing financial support for staff who were going to incur additional expenses, as promised by the VC of Newcastle University, whose institution is offering interest-free loans to staff affected (see the post on Newcastle’s official Facebook page: http://tinyurl.com/jzoupat); such as explaining clearly what the University had done and was planning to do to influence decision-making by Government (again, Newcastle); or contacting staff regularly to keep them up-to-date about the latest developments (at Bristol, staff received more or less one email a week in the months following the referendum). Credit where it’s due, Lancaster appears to be good at listening to staff - there was a series of “listening events” in early July, and the FAQ that was produced following them is advertised on the front page of the staff portal. There’s a lot of “we’re treating this seriously and giving it our full attention”, but not much in the way of detail, and they don’t seem to have been updated since they were first posted. And there’s going to be another information event next week, which seems to be mainly focussed on research funding implications. And... though our VC may well be actively engaged in behind-the scenes machinations, that’s it as far as we know. Presumably there’ll be another FAQ after the next event. Apparently, at Lancaster Brexit means FAQ-all.

*****************************************************

NEW UCEA TOP DOG

Staff will no doubt have rejoiced at the tidings that the new chair of the university employers’ organisation UCEA is none other than our own highly-esteemed Vice-Chancellor, Professor Mark E. Smith (see LU Text 759).

Professor Smith’s connections with UCEA go back a long way and he has been involved in the work of a number of its subcommittees over the years. More recently, he provided a temporary job at Lancaster for former UCEA chief officer, the delightfully named Ms. Jocelyn Prudence. The current CEO, Ms. Helen Fairfoul (honestly, we’re not making up these names) welcomed his appointment, observing that: “His experience from positions at a number of institutions and knowledge of employment issues will be much valued in leading the UCEA Board and guiding UCEA’s work on behalf of its members during the coming period.”

Professor Smith will certainly have his work cut out for him “during the coming period”. UCEA is still locked in a bitter dispute with UCU over pay, the gender pay gap and the casualization of the academic workforce. One of the last actions of Professor Smith’s predecessor, Professor Sir Paul Curran, was to impose a 1.1% pay increase, far below what UCU members felt they needed to restore the salary levels eroded over the last five years. This was certainly consistent with the way he (and Ms. Prudence) had treated the trade unions during his tenure at UCEA. Then there is Brexit, with its implications for the future of HE, causing considerable alarm to employers and trade unions alike.

UCU members were once again girding themselves for an escalation of the dispute to a marking boycott when the news came that the UCU leadership had decided to “pause” the industrial action in order to “consult” the membership further. This decision was made within a few days of the announcement of Professor Smith’s appointment as UCEA Chair. Probably just a coincidence. However, it is worth noting his statement that he looked forward to “working constructively with the HE trade unions on both pay and non-pay issues”. A signal to UCU, perhaps, that there might be more on offer after all? He will be aware, as will the unions, that a national industrial dispute in the sector will hardly assist the presentation of a united front when it comes to lobbying the government for special treatment for HE as Brexit becomes a horrible reality.

*****************************************************

ANOTHER GLORIOUS VICTORY

After subtext reported the horrific treatment of comrades in Coventry forced onto dishonourable contracts staff have thrown off the shackles of oppression, and won the right to move back to their original contracts and be covered by a new recognition agreement for collective bargaining. Now, we don’t know that it was subtext’s ferocious intervention that led to the climbdown. But we can heavily imply that it was.

*****************************************************

CALLING ALL SLACKERVISTS

University ward Cllr Sam Armstrong (Labour) has started an online petition calling for Unis Minster Jojo to conduct two separate reviews: one into the “current financial arrangements that exist between the Government and higher education students for funding student living costs”. The other ”to review the fairness of tuition fees”.

The first review certainly feels overdue. The second, well, we’ll see when David Cameron’s university flings fly. Anyone wishing to add their name can do so here: http://tinyurl.com/h2wmp7z

*****************************************************

KNOWING YOUR BOUNDARIES

In our last issue (subtext 151) we reminded readers of the proposed changes the Boundary Commission for England was initiating for local parliamentary boundaries. Gone will be Lancaster & Fleetwood; gone will be Morecambe & Lunesdale. In their place would be Lancaster & Morecambe with the University residing in the new seat of North Lancashire.

As subtext surmised the Conservatives have submitted a counter-proposal for a Lancaster and Wyre seat (which would extend to Preston) and a Morecambe and Lunesdale seat which would include Bulk ward. This would mean the Ridge, Newton and Freehold would have a different MP to the city centre the rest of Lancaster south of the river.

The inhabitants of these wards are not happy and their local Labour County Councillor Lizzi Collinge has organised a residents’ petition against what are described as these ‘ludicrous counter-proposals’ – this can be signed at a number of local businesses. The accompanying literature describes Lancaster and Morecambe as natural communities. Those of us with access to subtext’s vast memory vault can recall a time when Lancaster and Morecambe were sworn enemies and angry words and more accompanied the annexing of Morecambe by Lancaster City Council back in the day.

*****************************************************

IT’S WORSE THAN THAT, HE’S A LIVE BILL

Management School LT1 was packed on Thursday, 20 October for a lunchtime panel discussion about the HE Bill that is trundling its way through the Parliamentary process at the moment. The meeting entitled ‘Education is a business. Is for profit. is a right’ was chaired by Julie Hearn, UCU NEC member. The gathering was described as an opportunity for people to come together, learn more about the Bill and share those concerns collectively.

The meeting began with three short addresses by local MP and alumna, Cat Smith, UCU past president, Liz Lawrence, and Lancaster University Students’ Union president, Rhiannon Llystyn Jones. This was followed by questions from the floor which were answered in turn by each speaker. We should not have to draw our readers attention to the fact that it is still very rare for the entire top table at such an event to be women but we do.

The general consensus was that the Bill is a thoroughly bad thing – a solution looking for a problem – that should be opposed at every step of its journey. Whatever your view on the Bill it is clear that it will fundamentally alter the regulation and landscape of our sector. A national opposition of staff, students, parents and legislators is growing to the further commodification and privatization of university education. subtext welcomes this show of activism – with workers and management singing from the same hymn sheet you would like to think that sense would prevail. So why such an ill-thought out piece of legislation should, given all the other potentially life-changing business the government is committed to, be so forcefully pushed through the Commons is something of mystery. Cat Smith’s view on this was it was being used as a bonding exercise by the Conservative party, geeing up the troops for the battle over Brexit. Such a sad indictment on the political process.

*****************************************************

DOWN WITH THIS SORT OF THING

As regular as clockwork, student activists arrived outside the University careers fair to protest some of the less edifying companies that we welcome onto our campus, and as usual it was BAE systems getting most of the attention. subtext learns that while the activists were distributing the following flyers (http://tinyurl.com/jb2slfr), a careers staffer came out and remonstrated with the students, threatening to sue them for libel over their use of the distorted university logo.

It doesn’t appear that the University would have a particularly strong case in suing for libel. The document as a whole could be considered inflammatory, although entirely defensible if the claims within it are proven to be true. The University could claim that the distorted but recognisable logo is a breach of copyright, and that it makes clear to whom the ‘libel’ refers, but subtext reckons that most legal consultants would advise the University to “get over it”.

It’s positive to see that student activism is alive and well on campus - we can only hope that the remonstration it was met with was merely an individual overstepping their bounds and not a latent desire to suppress it.

*****************************************************

CAVEAT EDUCATOR

Now that universities are subject to regulation by the Competition and Markets Authority, there are rumblings of concern that many departments may be in breach of their obligations to their “customers”, errr, students and students-to-be. By having out-of-date information in course descriptions and on departmental websites, they may be “mis-selling” (because education is a saleable product, dontchaknow?) to future students by giving them inaccurate information when they come to choose their courses. Though the somewhat sinisterly named Information Management Committee has deemed the University to be (just about) compliant, it seems there is still some way to go. Of course, as popular webcomic XKCD noted long ago, most information available on university websites is pretty much useless, so it may not actually matter: http://xkcd.com/773/

*****************************************************

TRUMPED UP CLAIMS

Speaking of misleading, it came to subtext’s attention last week that LU Text 759 has forgotten that academics are minded to fact check, as pesky experts will do. While LU Text proclaimed that Lancaster “have now been ranked number nine in the Higher Education World University Rankings” a few eagle-eyed academics pointed out that the THE shows Lancaster as 9th in the UK rankings, a rather different situation to being 9th in the world. But still, who needs facts when we’re the best university, we’re so good you can’t even, crooked York, we’re going to build a wall, we’re just the best, make Lancaster great again.

*****************************************************

NUS FROM NOWHERE

In a new attempt to help student politicians get their foot in the Westminster door, the NUS leadership has gotten themselves caught up in an antisemitism row. Two weeks ago the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee published its ‘Antisemitism in the UK report’, which - amongst other worrying findings - made specific reference to the current president of the NUS, Malia Bouattia, and her - allegedly misinterpreted - historical comments about Jewish student societies, Zionism and the Israel-Palestine dispute.

Following the publication of the report Falmouth & Exeter Students’ Union officer, Amanda Chetwynd-Cowieson (We know, what are the odds?) penned an open letter to Bouattia, condemning her apparent lack of appropriate contrition (http://tinyurl.com/ht7hy4g). The signatories include the Union of Jewish Students President and Labour Students National Chair.

This in turn sparked another open letter - this time signed by members of the NUS NEC as well as its Black Students Officer, International Students’ Officer and Vice President (Welfare) - condemning the report for its “selective and partisan approach” and “attempts to delegitimise [the] NUS and discredit Malia Bouattia as its president. An attack on NUS is an attack on the student and union movements”(http://tinyurl.com/gso9agk).

Lancaster’s officers have stayed out of the debate so far, though subtext notes some Lancaster students have signed the latter letter. Is the fact that there aren’t LUSU officers on either side an indication that the jury is already stifling freedom of expression on campus, as any potentially controversial stance is kicked into the long grass?

*****************************************************

VOTE FOR POSTGRADS! (STEP IN TIME)

For postgraduate readers, your subtext correspondent had a novel experience last week: she forgot to vote in a LUSU election. Missing one in nine years should not really feel like a point of failure, but only 131 postgraduates (out of 3,737 - according to Google, we don’t know how they know this) voted for the new Chair of the PG Board, and Emily Davison threw herself in front of a horse for this shit.

Going off the old adage that the one who does not vote shall not moan, she thought it might be helpful for LUSU (and any departments keen to get their PGs more involved in representative structures, in fact anyone trying to get us to do anything), if she offers the following observations:

1. It’s easy to be quite forgetful when you have a whole research project in your head, as well as potentially a whole year’s worth of undergraduate curriculum for those who teach, and all the life stuff that hits you after undergraduate. 

2. As a result of point one, if we get an email telling us to do something we either do it straight away, or see it and then never think of it again. 

3. Ergo, at least one email a day saying “oi, have you voted yet?” would probably be quite useful. It might seem like it would be annoying, but we get so many emails anyway that we’re quite use to filtering out stuff we don’t need. (See point one again.)

4. We tend to be racked with to-do list guilt and insecurities so if the reminder email is worded quite harshly we’ll do it in super quick time, because we live in constant fear of disappointing people.

5. Offer us coffee and do postgrad hustings on a Wednesday afternoon when no one is teaching (we want to hide from undergrads) and have it as an hour long ‘round table’. 

6. Please don’t hate us. 

*****************************************************

HOW ABSENT MINDED ARE YOU?

Colleagues of a certain age joke of ‘senior moments’ or ‘early onset’ as a way of explaining lapses in memory, although perhaps we should not approve of such asides. (subtext would welcome our readers views on the issue of such dilemmas i.e. do we replace ‘brainstorming' with ‘thought showering'?) However, your correspondent witnessed an example of forgetfulness combined with a degree of foresight the other week. Travelling home from work on the bus during Welcome Week he witnessed a middle-aged woman flagging the bus down in Hala Square. She was not for travelling but boarded the bus to retrieve a large bag (Tesco bag for life size) of shopping from the luggage space. She had forgotten she had a hefty, bulky bag with her when getting off the bus but then had the quick wittedness to know that the bus would retrace its journey after leaving the University. Good job she did not travel out from town on a Blackpool or Preston bus. It is not up there with leaving your inflatable boat, coffin, false limb or lawn mower on the bus - some of the many strange and unusual items items left on public transport – but it just goes to show how easy it is to forget why you got on the bus in the first place.

*****************************************************

SHART ATTACK

From: Roger Nightly, President, Lune Valley UCUnison.

To: Mike M. Shart, VC, Lune Valley Enterprise University (LuVE-U).

Subject: Congratulations on your new post.

Dear Professor Shart,

I’ve just read the press release in LuVE-UText that came out about ten minutes ago. On behalf of the UCUnison, I’d like to congratulate you on your appointment as the Chair of UCEA! It was a most unexpected bit of news – my sources elsewhere are claiming that the post went to another bloke, but our press office seems to have beaten the other official channels. Is that normal practice?

Anyhow, congratulations either way. Although UCUnison has taken a hard line on staff pay, we have at least appreciated that your lack of key influence tied your hands when it came to reaching mutually beneficial agreements. I’d be interested to know what plans we have moving forwards?

Roger.

***

From: Mike M. Shart, VC, Lune Valley Enterprise University (LuVE-U).

To: Hewlett Venkklinne, Director of Satisfactory Situation Surveillance.

Subject: FWD: Congratulations on your new post.

Right Hewlett, it’s time for you to earn your pay packet. As you can see from the email I just forwarded to you, we have a severe high risk KPI situation here. Here’s the gist of it.

1. We announced that I’m Chair of UCEA.

2. I’m not actually Chair of UCEA.

3. I need to become Chair of UCEA.

I know I instructed you to publish the press release before the results were actually announced, but in fairness, I was an absolute cert, so none of us could have anticipated this. Come to my office immediately, please.

Mike.

***

From: Mike M. Shart.

To: Roger Nightly.

Subject: re: Congratulations on your new post.

Hi Roger!

My thanks for your congratulations on my appointment as Chair of UCEA. Yes, I am Chair of UCEA. And since being appointed Chair of UCEA by other people involved in UCEA, I’ve been thinking long and hard about what we should do moving forwards.

To be honest, I’m thinking of taking UCEA, of which I am Chair, in different directions. I mean, complaining about pay is so 1972, isn’t it? I’m going to be taking a holistic approach to relations with staff, and looking at imaginative new ways to improve their situation. So, things to do with sandwiches. Better sandwiches and cheaper sandwiches, and maybe cheaper food in general – that’s a great way of keeping the pound in the staff’s pocket, no? And more live music acts for all of campus to do. Didn’t LuVE-U used to have all the big stars in The Grand Cavern?

Of course, I won’t be totally neglecting pay. But maybe we should start from the ground up – I want to focus particularly on the pay of catering staff, who have been so horribly overlooked! I will get on to staff pay, maybe in about five years, so don’t worry.

Anyway, I’m sure that all sounds good. Thanks again on congratulating me on my appointment as Chair of UCEA.

Best,

Mike M. Shart | Chair of UCEA.

***

From: Mike M. Shart, VC, Lune Valley Enterprise University (LuVE-U).

To: Vikki Bowen, Head of Governance Solutions.

CC: Hewlett Venkklinne, Director of Satisfactory Situation Surveillance.

Hi Vikki – a small matter for you to attend to. I need you to create a byelaw for a new ‘University Catering & Entertainment Association’, make me Chair, and bung it in the statutes immediately please. Don’t ask questions.

Mike.

PS. Nice one, Hewlett. ;)

*****************************************************

REVIEW: LANCASTER MUSICAL FESTIVAL

Not on the same scale as Glastonbury but the 8th Annual Lancaster Music Festival was a big, beautiful, boozy, bonanza. With one of the sponsors being iLancaster and the festival featuring ULMS Big Band, ULMS Brass band and ULMS Choir it is the nearest thing we have got to a decent town/gown event although no one would want to label it as such. From the raw, raucous skiffle of Miles Hillbillies to the preppy pop jazz of Quay Change and all types in between there was something for everyone bar full blown classical orchestral works. Not sure where on the spectrum Gobble de Gook sit - they were quite different from most of the acts we managed to catch. Their early evening set in the Golden Lion on Sunday was mixture of experimental latin fusion with a funky soul twist laid on a tight French punk moving tableau of harmonies. As we said - different.

Running from late on Wednesday (13 October) to late on Monday (17 October) and featuring over 400 acts in 43 different locations this was an ambitious project and for this correspondent (and accompanying eldest visiting from that other Festival city, Edinburgh) the organisers dutifully delivered. Sprinkled with some international and national acts the programme featured predominately Lancaster bands/groups/artists. It was good to see some old Lancaster stalwarts, Sun Street Stompers, the Duo, Howard Haigh, Get Carter and a host of others mixing it with the new and up and coming acts. Predominate amongst these was Lake Como who played the main stage at Lancaster Castle on Sunday night. Nice to see old favourites such as Hustle, having undergone numerous personnel changes over the years, now have an extended brass section and are still belting out the Blues. It is something of a sociological phenomenon that a place as relatively small as Lancaster has over the years produced, and continues to do so, such an eclectic and talented bunch of musicians.

The city centre had an entirely different vibe throughout the Festival, the weather was generally kind, throngs of people meandering between the various venues, the music on the air changing as people moved from one outdoor stage to another. Some folk obviously, after consulting their programmes, moved on to enjoy a different act elsewhere whilst some festival goers found a venue and stayed put whatever acts were performing. We tried on more than one occasion to get into the John O’Gaunt but eventually gave up! A special mention should go to the Robert Gillow which other than in the wee small hours of the morning was open and host to a cornucopia of acts throughout the entire Festival.

Apart from the castle acts (a tokenistic £1 fee) and a bargain £5 for the Menno Gootjes (member of Focus, mega band in the 1970s) guitar masterclass workshop, everywhere else was free. Which in theory is great – however because everything was so accessible the music at times almost became a background to what was essentially a money making scheme for the pubs. Which is what is probably needed due to the current climate within which they are operating. And it was great to see places like the Bobbin back up and running after being hit hard by the floods. We are sure they and others appreciate the extra custom. However there were times when the acts didn't get the respect they deserved, as no-one is paying to see them, there is nothing to lose if you leave half way through a song or talk all the way through. Plus it may have stopped the more discerning customer a chance to see anything as they could be put off by what at times seemed like a four day piss-up. Perhaps in future years the Festival would benefit from a shift of focus towards the artist and the music rather than the venues and their takings.

Be that as it may it did bring people into the city. Visitors could be spotted with their Festival maps trying to work out where the Hall was. During the day it was a very family friendly affair with babes-in arms, toddlers, kids, teenagers, mums and dads and older folk mingling and enjoying what was a wonderful extended weekend of live music. It is difficult to judge these things but students seemed thin on the ground although this maybe says more about your correspondents taste in particular music genres and acts and where they were performing than anything else. It was striking however how predominately and achingly white the audience and acts were but given the demographic make-up of Lancaster district this is hardly surprising. Finally, the other observation thrown-up by the Festival was how it brought the various tribes of Lancaster and its hinterlands into the city centre. These are distinct groupings of folk who are rarely seen in the city together who descended upon this temporary ‘tin pan alley’ because of their love of and/or curiosity about music in all its glorious forms – people entering places they had obviously never been in before to listen and see a band or singer that they had heard before or had caught their imagination. Sociological insights aside it was a brilliant musical extravaganza for which the organising team should be very proud. Thank you.

*****************************************************

LETTERS

Dear subtext,

Thanks as always for the glorious write up. Although the Guardian have wrote it up like it’s a one man crusade, I was merely sending a press release from the whole Conservative group. Of course I would want the election in term time when everyone's registered, but I would also like people to talk to each other to try and save some money. The beauty of subtext is its ability to hold the institution it loves to account, especially to ask for collaboration and co-operation between its constituent members. I have merely extrapolated those values in this role. And, in fairness, I did get a personal response from the Council Leader. If only Professor Smith was as responsive to you?

Charlie Edwards

*****************************************************

The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: James Groves, Lizzie Houghton, Ian Paylor, Ronnie Rowlands, Joe Thornberry, and Johnny Unger.