Management back-tracks over student suspensions

Last Wednesday 10 March, six students formerly suspended from the University of Sussex had their penalisations modified so as to permit them to continue with their academic studies.

Around 600 students rallied outside Sussex House last Thursday 11 March to protest against management’s decision to suspend six students following the previous week’s occupation. Photo: Sam Waterman

The students, dubbed ‘The Sussex Six’, were initially suspended on Friday 5 March by Vice-Chancellor Michael Farthing. They each received a letter from the university stating they had been “positively identified” by the management as “leading participants” of the Stop the Cuts rally and occupation of Sussex House earlier that week. Read more

University calls police on students who protest outside Sussex House against university cuts

Last Wednesday 3 March at 12.30pm students occupied Sussex House for five hours in protest against proposed course cuts and job losses. Police in a convoy of vans were called onto campus to contain the occupation and the accompanying rally.

University management seek to reduce the budget for 2009/10 by £3m on a turnover of £160m, with additional savings of up to £5m in 2010/11. As a result, 115 staff across campus face redundancy. A statement from the occupation said: “The job cuts would eradicate the environmental science degree program, and significantly reduce the size of the English, history, and life science departments. The student advice service, the crèche, security services and catering staff also face savage cuts.”
Read more

Academics and MPs denounce cuts at Sussex

Britain’s higher education system is recognised across the globe as a gold standard, second only to the US. Eighteen of our universities rank in the world’s top 100. Comprising just 1% of the global population, Britain produces 7.9% of the world’s academic research publications.

Read more

£29m building costs

The University of Sussex is moving ahead with a £29 million project to replace older teaching buildings on campus. This is despite the backdrop of cuts of £5 million being made to teaching, staff, and student support budgets over the next two years.

The huge expenditure on the new buildings is possible at a time when all areas of academic life at the university are facing cuts because of the way in which the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) allocates its funding to universities.
Read more

Tories would target UK visas for foreign students

The Tories are set to clampdown on UK visas for foreign students, particularly those from Afghani­stan and Pakistan. The proposal, put forward by Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, aims to offset what the Conservatives describe as “the weakest link in Britain’s border controls.”

Grayling, who has been consulting higher education about the propos­als, claims that Britain’s lax controls have resulted in “tens of thousands of bogus students in the UK, and hundreds of unregulated colleges providing student visas, but little education.”

Student visas now represent three-quarters of the visas issued under the UK points-based system, which was introduced in 2008. Indeed, Britain’s intake of foreign students has trebled since Labour came to office in 1997. The gov­ernment issued 236,470 student visas last year, compared to 69,607 handed out in 1998.

Despite recognition that foreign students are money-spinners for the financially pressed sector, “a clamp­down is still necessary to account for the high numbers”, Grayling claims.

Grayling has also observed that there are only 165 universities and higher education colleges in the United Kingdom, yet last month a total of 1,925 organisations stood approved by the UK Border Agency to sponsor migrant students.

The Tories claim that in a recent nine-month period, only 29 visa applicants out of 66,000 applying to enter the UK from Pakistan – one of the high risk countries – were actually interviewed by officials. Moreover, more than 13,000 applica­tions from Afghanistan and Pakistan have not been fraud-checked at all since October 2008.

Under Grayling’s plans, only higher education institutions reg­istered at Companies House would be entitled to fast-track students. Foreign students in non-recognised bodies would be required to pay a bond of £1,000-£2,000, repaid in instalments at the end of each academic year. Rules would be tight­ened to prevent student applicants borrowing money to prove they are financially independent, and stu­dents would be required to leave the UK after their course in order to apply for a work visa. The Tories would also place a ban on students switching courses in this country.

These plans come at a time when many British universities are strapped for cash, and the income from foreign students has helped to keep many institutions afloat. One quarter of the student population at the University of Sussex is com­prised of international students and the Vice Chancellor, Michael Far­thing, plans for this figure to grow.

Stop the Cuts – Protest Video (3/12/09)

A video showing the protest on the 3rd December 2009 against over 100 proposed job cuts at the University of Sussex.

Faculty speak out against the cuts

A selection of the overwhelming number of responses we have received…

“The VC, Michael Farthing, came to Sussex two years ago on a ticket of growth and expansion. Now he is imposing the most savage set of cuts in the history of the University. In the eyes of most faculty and staff, he is completely discredited.”
Philosophy Tutor; Anon.

“I have no confidence in the current management strategy as a way of reducing costs and developing the University. At best, it will create an atmosphere of despair and disillusionment, which will negatively affect research, teaching, and administration.
Redundancies do not appear to have been dished out simply on the basis of individual performance, but are clearly connected to the University’s ‘development plans’. As such, none of us can be certain that in a few months, under the excuse of yet another financial crisis in the University, we would not be told that our research or teaching does not fit any longer with existing or future priorities.
I do not want to live and work under such a state of fear and anxiety, nor do I want to relinquish my intellectual freedom in order to keep my job. To put it simply, I believe that my future in the University depends directly on stopping all redundancies now.”
Global Studies Tutor; Anon.

“The English department has traditionally been not only the flagship department, but the cash cow producing a surplus income over the last five years, which has subsidised other factions of the University. Why is it that the first time we go into deficit, the result is job cuts in our department? Had we [the English department] been allowed to keep the surpluses that we have produced over the years – i.e. run to our budget – we would be in a very different position now.”
English Tutor; Anon.

“Perhaps the salaries of Senior Management should be reduced to save many members of staff in the firing line?”
Informatics Tutor; Anon.

“I would like to say how saddened I am by the proposed job cuts within Student Support. The Student Advisors and Student Support Coordinators are an extremely dedicated team who are committed to helping students during their time at Sussex.
The Student Advisors work with students who have a wide range of often complex support needs. These students are greatly valued and they deserve a robust support network to help them with any difficulties they encounter.
The drastic reduction in Student Advisors will have a detrimental affect on the ’student experience’ of many of our students. Student well-being should be a paramount concern of all members of University staff.”
Student Support Coordinator; Anon.

Hundreds of angry students storm Bramber House

On Thursday 3rd December, hundreds of outraged students stormed Bramber House for the second time this term. The demonstration highlighted the way in which senior managers at the University of Sussex have fundamentally underestimated student and staff anger regarding the proposed cuts to the University’s educational and support services.

By 10 am, almost 500 students and staff had gathered outside the doors of Bramber House, where an emergency meeting of Senate was taking place. Senate is the highest academic decision making body at the University, featuring members of academic staff. The meeting was chaired by the Vice-Chancellor, Michael Farthing, the man responsible for the drastic cuts proposals.

Protesting students and staff carried banners and pickets in an act of resistance against the cuts and in solidarity with those who have been affected. Students shouted slogans such as: “You Say Cut Back, We Say Fight Back”, and “No Ifs, No Buts, No Education Cuts.”

While gathered outside Bramber House, many students spoke out against the proposed cuts, including University of Sussex Students’ Union (USSU) officers, and students from the schools of English, Informatics, Life Sciences, and Engineering. Paul Cecil, President of the Sussex University College Union (UCU), and an international MA student, Tabitha Rohrer, also spoke.

Rohrer spoke of “an administration of senior managers on bloated salaries, who have increasingly cut students, staff, and the Union out of the decision making process in order to facilitate their short-sighted and ineffective strategies.

“This mismanagement is unacceptable, and speaking as someone who has paid ten thousand pounds to be here, I am outraged that people such as Michael Farthing have essentially lied to me about what kind of an institution I was coming to”, she said.

In high spirits, students decided to storm Bramber House in an attempt to make their voices heard, while chanting, “Michael Farthing, Shame on You” and, “There’s only one redundancy we want to see, Michael Farthing, Sussex VC”.

Eventually students managed to get into the corridor outside the room in which the Senate meeting was taking place. They remained there until the University called the police to quell the protest at around 11 am. Upon arrival of the police, the protesters left peacefully.

Owen Richards, the Academic Registrar, told The Badger of his experience of the demonstration from within the meeting room, “It went beyond free speech and making your point, it was pretty scary being in that room. The internal stud walls were literally bowing inwards with people using objects to smash up the walls and doors. It was terrible.”

It is unclear which objects Richards was referring to. Two reporters from The Badger who witnessed the protest confirmed that no objects were used. There was no damage to Bramber House following the demonstration.

The meeting of Senate was called on the premise that it would give student and staff representatives the chance to discuss management’s proposals for the 115 redundancies across the University. In the meeting, an academic member of the Senate directly asked the Vice-Chancellor to allow a vote to measure Senate support of the proposals. Farthing refused.

Tom Wills, President of USSU, who also attended the meeting, said: “It is a disgrace that the Vice-Chancellor refused to allow a vote in the meeting to measure Senate’s support for the redundancy proposals. This shows that senior management are well aware that their proposals have no support among staff or students, but are intent on pushing them through regardless.”

Wills added, “Today’s fantastic demonstration can only be the start of a determined campaign. Over the next three months we need to use every tactic at our disposal to put pressure on University management. We need consultation on our terms, not on theirs. We need to show management that they ignore the voices of students and staff at their peril.

“They know we have the power to stop these cuts – let’s use it.”

UCU threatens strike action

On Wednesday 2nd December, the University and College Union (UCU) warned the University of Sussex that it could face strike action if it pressed ahead with controversial plans to axe more than 100 jobs.

At an emergency meeting on Tuesday 1st December, local UCU members voted unanimously to give the local branch at Sussex a mandate to ballot for industrial action if a resolution to the current crisis could not be reached through negotiation. They also passed a motion of no confidence in Vice-Chancellor Michael Farthing’s proposals.

The response from the academic community to Farthing’s plans to axe 115 jobs has been swift and demonstrates a united opposition to the cuts from the people who will be hit the hardest.

The news about possible industrial action comes just five days after students and staff held their first protests against the job losses on Thursday 26th November.

Members were outraged to learn that the University is refusing to release its detailed plans to the Schools and Departments under threat, and is also denying the documents to its Senate members.

The UCU warned that any industrial action was always a last resort, but said that it would fight any threat of compulsory redundancies. The Union said its initial analysis of the planned cuts revealed they were unworkable and would significantly damage the quality of education at the University.

The UCU said it was working closely with the Students’ Union and the other campus unions to preserve the University of Sussex’s excellent reputation, which saw it ranked as one of the fastest improving universities in the most recent National Student Survey results, and warned the University not to ignore its staff or students.

University of Sussex UCU representative, Paul Cecil, said: “Industrial action is a last resort, but UCU members here at Sussex have made it quite clear that they want to ballot for action if management pushes ahead with its deeply flawed strategy. If the University of Sussex wants to maintain or enhance its reputation it needs to think very carefully about the impact cutting staff will have.”

Lies, spin and the fight against cut-backs

For those of you who have seen the University’s recent ‘response to financial challenges’ you could be forgiven for finding it laughable. Not that any of what it contains is funny, only that the language they have used to justify what amounts to massive staff and services cuts across campus, is duplicitous and quite frankly illogical.
Read more

Next Page »