Quote tigertot="tigertot"I found this link: recourse.org.uk/ucu-warns-of-ind ... d-through/ I haven't followed the other links through so do not know whether it will give you what you are after. UCU did set out its case several months ago, I read what they put forward & thought it a reasonable argument. I voted yes for action short of a strike, no for a strike. Both votes came out yes. I have continued to work 50 hours a week since, it is simply not possible to work to rule without it significantly affecting those I manage, the university (who are generally a fantastic employer) or the students we are here to support. Undoubtedly there are some within unions who do see it as a political battle & an opportuntiy to bring down the capatilist state. But they are a massive minority. Very few work in HE to get rich. Our VC who runs an organisation with a half billion pounds turnover, made £35m profit last year, has >40,000 staff & students - the second biggest in the UK, only earns c£250k. Now I happen to think no-one should or needs to earn any more than that, but the vast majority of people here earn relatively low wages but accept that for job security, good holidays & a decent pension.'" the uni only made that profit via the VLS scheme and have also another surplus of £7million too, they basically cut 800 jobs via allowing people to sell them their jobs for 18months gross pay. but mr arthur is ok on his £250 k a year salary and his chauffer driven audi and his flights back down to his home in southampton on a weekend i bet he doesn't pay for his flights does he? he claimed he didn't want to put tuition fees up then what did he do? put them up to the maximum of £9k a year!! don't make him out to be a hero when people on here know the score.

Quote tigertot="tigertot"I found this link: recourse.org.uk/ucu-warns-of-ind ... d-through/ I haven't followed the other links through so do not know whether it will give you what you are after. UCU did set out its case several months ago, I read what they put forward & thought it a reasonable argument. I voted yes for action short of a strike, no for a strike. Both votes came out yes. I have continued to work 50 hours a week since, it is simply not possible to work to rule without it significantly affecting those I manage, the university (who are generally a fantastic employer) or the students we are here to support. Undoubtedly there are some within unions who do see it as a political battle & an opportuntiy to bring down the capatilist state. But they are a massive minority. Very few work in HE to get rich. Our VC who runs an organisation with a half billion pounds turnover, made £35m profit last year, has >40,000 staff & students - the second biggest in the UK, only earns c£250k. Now I happen to think no-one should or needs to earn any more than that, but the vast majority of people here earn relatively low wages but accept that for job security, good holidays & a decent pension.'" the uni only made that profit via the VLS scheme and have also another surplus of £7million too, they basically cut 800 jobs via allowing people to sell them their jobs for 18months gross pay. but mr arthur is ok on his £250 k a year salary and his chauffer driven audi and his flights back down to his home in southampton on a weekend i bet he doesn't pay for his flights does he? he claimed he didn't want to put tuition fees up then what did he do? put them up to the maximum of £9k a year!! don't make him out to be a hero when people on here know the score.

Where have I done that? I don't actually particulalry like him that much. What I was doing was demonstrating that someone can run a very successful huge business without obscene remuneration. I have no idea if he pays for his weekly flights, I would guess not. But that doesn't bother me, I am more bothered about the attitude that it is ok fly such relatively short distances on a regular basis. But he offsets the carbon so that's ok.

On the subject of the strikes we have all agreed that there should be the right to strike and the right not to strike. However should we really allow a business or indeed the whole country to be brought to a halt by a vote in favour of doing so by a minority of the workforce and population?

The UNISON ballot had a 29% turnout equating to only 23% of the workforce voting for the strike

GMB had a 33% turnout equating to 26% of the total workforce voting for the strike

UCATTS had 27% turnout meaning just 22% of the total workforce voted for to strike

UNITE had a 31% turnout equating to around 25% of the total workforce

These figures are hardly a ringing endorsement for strike action for what can only be regarded selfish action by a minority, when negotiations are still going on to change what were overgenerous and unsustainable pension terms even in the good times let alone in the current and forseeable future economic climate.

^ And have a look at turn outs for general elections, about the same.

Thats why the Governemtn haven't made a sound about the ballots, they know they'd be on a looser

I would question how well run a not-for-profit organisation that makes a £35M profit is.

All Universities seek to build up a surplus, for a rainy day as it were, but adding £35M a year to it suggests to me that either students or research funding bodies are getting short-changed somewhere...

You honestly believe the likes of Sibbald and Whelan at Unite will be docked a day's pay when this day of action goes ahead!! No wonder they find it so easy to get the lemmings over the cliff.

So you thought he/she should respect your decision to strike but you couldn't respect his/hers decision not to!!

I get your point, but found it galling to hear David Cameron dismissing these figures as lack of mandate when precisely 23% of the electorate voted for his party at the 2010 General Election.

When was the last general election with a turn out in the 30% region?

Thanks for the reply, I'll take a look.

I'm not generally in favour of a cap on potential earnings, but I am in favour of a system that allows transparency of decision making, and that is fair an equal to all.

I understand that there are many in unions that are simply trying to look out for not only themselves but also their co workers, and this is honourable, however as with many areas of society, the few bad apples can rot the whole barrel, and this appears to be the case I see at the moment.

Let's hope that for all concerned, a workable, long term solution can be found quickly, and that those who seek to individually profit from the misfortune of others are left contemplating their own principles as a result.