| subtext | |
|
|
subtext issue 112 28 November 2013 ***************************************************** 'Truth: lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every fortnight during term-time. All editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors@lancaster.ac.uk. Please delete as soon as possible after receipt. Back issues and subscription details can be found at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext. The editors welcome letters, comments, suggestions and opinions from readers. subtext reserves the right to edit submissions. subtext does not publish material that is submitted anonymously, but is willing to consider without obligation requests for publication with the name withheld. For tips to prevent subtext from getting swept up into your 'junk email folder', see http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/dejunk/. If you're viewing this using Outlook, the formatting might look better if you click on the message at the top saying 'Extra line breaks in this message were removed', and select 'Restore line breaks'. CONTENTS: editorial, news in brief, end of the 1994 group, stressing out, brave new world, customer service excellence, time to call time on zero hours, probation, Great Hall concerts, links, letters ***************************************************** EDITORIAL We noted the advice from a reader, in the last edition, regarding the use of a certain flag to aid concentration when writing the editorial. We appreciate the advice but have declined its use for fear of sending out mixed messages. At the risk of over-working the sailing/travelling metaphor we thought we would, as we meander or hurtle or plunge slowly towards the end of term, reflect on where we are now, and where we are (or are not) going. Lancaster University has boarded the MOOCs express without anyone really knowing where it is headed. The internationalisation of the Lancaster brand continues apace, with few dissenting voices despite the fact that the destination on this particular journey is very loosely defined. The debacle that was the closure of Music continues to have ramifications; it is a rocky road indeed, particularly for the remaining students. The juggernaut of the wellbeing industry steams on picking up unwary travellers on its corporate way - see the article below. The national pay dispute has hit choppy waters and looks set to get more acrimonious (another one-day strike has been called on the 3rd December), not helped locally by the rather condescending tone of the latest Lancaster Internal Communication (are others irked by the use of this Orwellian instrument/phrase?) about the negotiations. In addition, managers and section-leaders sending text messages to cleaners and other low-paid staff informing them of 'meetings' on the 31st October (the day of the last strike) does not help and is behaviour that smacks of intimidation. Whatever one’s view of the strike action, this is practice that does not have a place in modern industrial relations. subtext understands it will only take a small movement to settle things – perhaps it just needs some wise input from our own VC on the national stage to allow both sides to 'save face' and settle before the wheels really do fall off. ***************************************************** NEWS IN BRIEF Power of the Press subtext would like to think it played a (very) small part in the decision announced recently by the Government regarding its 'gagging' law. It has put the most controversial part of its Lobbying Bill on hold as it struggles to secure the passage of the measure through Parliament. In an unusual move, ministers shelved for five weeks a debate on its plans to restrict campaigning by charities so they can rethink them. The retreat was seen as an attempt to head off an embarrassing defeat in the House of Lords, where peers were threatening to delay the Bill for three months. Lord Wallace of Saltaire, the Cabinet Office spokesman in the House of Lords, said discussion of the new charity laws would be put back until the week starting December 16. ******* Studio spaces Sauntering up by the Castle last weekend (17th November) your correspondent stumbled across Luneside Studios. They were having an 'open day', and we were invited in – very friendly folk showed us their wares and a very pleasant half-hour or so was spent in what for this correspondent was an unknown corner of Lancaster. Apparently, Luneside Studios have been providing studio spaces for artists in Lancaster for nearly thirty years. Originally located on St George's Quay, they moved to 26 Castle Park in 2008. Described as an arts collective (subtext approves of such things), they provide space for visual artists working in various media, particularly oils and canvas. The artists' paintings and other art-work can be viewed on the gallery pages on their website: http://www.lunesidestudios.com/index.htm. Or pop down and see them – very friendly people. ******* Spam There appears to be a noticeable increase in the amount of internet spam – mainly concerned with penis enlargement. Offers of Viagra have diminished. Opportunity for a smutty joke about a possible connection is hard to resist. No matter – the junk mail facility appears to deal with most of these. The only annoyance is the increase in the number of times you have to clear the junk mail folder and then empty your delete folder. A growing annoyance is the number of automated phone calls colleagues get – strange robotic voices offering to consolidate your loans or retrieve payment protection insurance monies. Recently colleagues have had a spate of very convincing automated voices offering free phone calls from your home phone – apparently regardless of whether you have a home phone or not! These are not on the same scale as the computer spam but jolly annoying. Is there any way of stopping this? ******* Primes You may have thought 2013 was a prime number, but it isn’t. Of course, it must be divisible by 3 - its digits add to 6 (2 + 0 + 1 + 3 = 6), which is divisible by 3. But did you realise it's the product of 61 and 33? Just asking. ******* Bridge By the way, did we mention how much we like the walkway/bridge across Lake Carter? Such a small thing, but very pleasing on the eye. ***************************************************** END OF THE 1994 GROUP As everyone must know, the 94 Group was dissolved a couple of weeks ago, and Lancaster no longer belongs to any university grouping. The Wikipedia entry on this subject was swiftly changed into the past tense. The 94 Group had been losing members for some time. UMIST left in 2004, when it amalgamated with Manchester University. LSE went in 2006; Warwick in 2008; then, last year, seven universities left, four of them to move into the Russell Group. Most recently, Reading University departed. Does this matter to Lancaster? It would perhaps have been face-saving to have left before the demise of the Group, but memories are short and this will quickly pass. The chief question before us is: would Lancaster be better off as a member of one of the groups? - as a member of the Russell Group, since we wouldn’t want to join any other? The Russell Group is remarkably disparate. Its member universities are between 850 and 50 years old; they have between 9000 and 39000 students; and their total income ranges from £230 million to over £1 billion. They have little in common, except that they all want to be near the front of the queue when the gravy is being doled out. Lancaster was one of the stronger universities in the 94 Group, with more research income than most other members. If Lancaster were to become a member of the Russell Group, it would be a minnow, with significantly less research income and fewer students than almost all the other members. We would be able to witness what went on, but would not be able to exert much influence unless our VC had a domineering personality - and that would have its downside. The Russell Group has a recent history of right-of-centre policies, including strong support for the introduction of tuition fees and for top-up fees. The Institute for Economic Affairs argues that it is essentially a protectionist group, which is likely to 'discourage innovation and encourage inefficiency'. Whatever our stance on these issues, we might be wary of joining such a group, even if the opportunity were to be offered. It's tempting to adopt the Groucho Marx position, and say we wouldn't want to join any group that would have us a member. However, the Russell Group tends to be consulted by government and industry, which sees it as the representative of elite higher education in the UK. Furthermore, the leader in The Higher of 14 November suggests that ambitious school-teachers and parents aim for their protégés to go to a Russell Group university. We’ve not seen any candidates who tell us they’ve been put under this kind of pressure - perhaps not surprisingly, since they will have applied to other places. But we do know that being a member of the Russell Group is widely used as a measure of a university’s excellence, rightly or wrongly. If Lancaster had the chance to join, which of us would want to turn it down? ***************************************************** STRESSING OUT There are a number of things that need to be said about the employment of Right Management to counsel employees of the university who have work-related issues. Of course, until a few years ago we had our own people to perform this function in-house, but they were got rid of, because, hey, who could possibly have foreseen that they would be needed? (it should be noted that this did not happen on the present VC's watch). Now we have no one to counsel staff under pressure, so the job has necessarily been outsourced, at lord-only-knows-how-much money. The economics of this decision are not part of our remit, but at the least we can take it that Right Management feel they can make a profit. One assumes that the University’s employment of Right Management is intended to perform (at least) two functions (and we're being as charitable as possible here). The first function is as a part of the University's desire to be a considerate employer and help staff deal with the pressure of work. Thanks for that, and if that's the only reason then fair enough. However, it seems likely that there is a second function which is, to put it bluntly, to cover the University's back if an employee, for any reason, decides to sue the University on the grounds of work-related stress. Such back-covering is not surprising, and the University would of course be remiss if it didn’t cover itself against this sort of claim. However there is a problem here. Expert advice received by subtext indicates that case law on the subject is unusually clear. Employing counsellors in this way won't do. If an employer does not put systems in place to help employees to deal with stress that is likely to occur on their job before it happens, then the employer is potentially liable. In other words, the University must perform a workplace risk assessment, and then take all reasonable steps to anticipate and deal with what may happen – it is not a defence to say that, once an employee has succumbed to stress-related illness, the University acted generously and helpfully by employing Right Management to counsel them, however pertinent and helpful such counsel might be. It may be, of course, that the University is also performing these anticipatory risk assessments and setting appropriate systems in place to deal with the likely consequences so identified. (Such action would, for example, be very much the sort of thing that Cary Cooper, Distinguished Professor of Organisational Psychology and Health, who is approvingly quoted on the Right Management website, would be eminently qualified to advise upon). If anyone is aware of such action taking place, we’d be delighted to hear of it. And an aside: 'Right Management' is an interesting name. One wonders if it is intended to evoke positive resonances in the listener of the Buddhist Noble Eightfold Path which, as every schoolboy knows, is comprised of Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Livelihood, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration. 'The Buddha leant forward with a slight smile on his curved lips. "And do not forget Right Management, grasshopper…"'. Nope, we can’t see it. **************************************************** BRAVE NEW WORLD subtext readers were no doubt shaken awake by the interview with John Fallon, CEO of Pearson, the world's largest education company, on Radio 4’s Today Programme on Friday 15th November. In subtext 111 we posited the view that 'universities are not like businesses' – Mr Fallon would disagree. He spoke of the sector being at a 'tipping point in education', and at a 'cusp of a learning revolution'. Mr. Fallon sees considerable growth opportunities for Pearson in education, driven by trends including the rapid growth of the global middle class, adoption of learning technologies, the connection between education and career prospects and increasing consumer spending on education, especially in emerging economies. Pearson is therefore planning to accelerate its push into digital learning, education services and emerging markets and, according to John Fallon, the company is directing its resources and capital "towards being an education services company that is global in its ambition and intensely local in its focus on its largest market opportunities". He announced in the interview the introduction of the Pearson efficacy framework, described as a unique, rigorous and scalable quality assurance system that checks that the necessary conditions are in place for an education programme to deliver the intended learning outcomes. It will by 2018 be reporting on the effectiveness of its biggest courses and learning aids with the same transparency as it files financial accounts. It will vary business by business, product by product, country to country but for everyone there will need to be an externally verifiable measure. At the same time, Pearson will give up investing in 'classroom tools' (ie books etc) where it cannot closely measure the outcomes. What makes this much more doable now than it has ever been before is the application of technology that has the capacity to transform the productivity of education around the world. Pearson believes that in the near future it can track and even forecast performance. According to Mr. Fallon, "we can predict after a month of study with a high degree of accuracy which students are most likely to drop out or fail to achieve their objectives"; but this is a degree of clairvoyancy to which all too few of us can lay claim. Read more at https://www.edsurge.com/n/2013-11-13-pearson-ceo-shares-his-road-ahead (and see also the next article) ***************************************************** CUSTOMER SERVICE EXCELLENCE Colleagues may have noticed that the University’s Professional Services (formerly Central Services) have achieved Customer Service Excellence (CSE) accreditation. This is a government-sponsored scheme whose laudable aim is to raise the standard of services in the UK, so that they become 'efficient, effective, excellent, equitable and empowering – with the citizen always and everywhere at the heart of service provision'. This has to be a good thing, doesn’t it? The Cabinet Office, which is promoting the scheme, clearly thinks so - it has registered the phrase Customer Service Excellence as a trade mark. Check it out at http://www.customerserviceexcellence.uk.com - the alliterative quotation above is taken from this web site. Our Director of Student-Based Services, Tom Finnigan, would like to see the University's CSE accreditation extended to include the administration of academic departments. However, admin is well managed in most departments, and it is not clear that this would bring about significant improvement in practices. The CSE scheme shares some characteristics with the British BS5750 quality standard, later ISO 9000, which was put together in the 1970s for the UK defence industry. But the teaching and research that are the prime functions of academic departments are very different from manufacturing, because they deal with human beings and their opinions and capabilities, not with hardware. And one of the attractive features of Lancaster is that its relatively devolved structure allows for differences of practice among the various departments, according to their various needs. Something that might give us pause is that assessment for the scheme is being carried out by four private certification bodies, one of which, G4S, is currently (with its partner Serco) the subject of a Serious Fraud Office investigation. Our own Central Services were accredited by the Centre for Assessment Ltd, whose focus, according to the company’s web site, is primarily on International ISO standards, which were written for commercial contractors, and are subject to similar reservations to ISO 9000 when used in an educational context. The Customer Service Excellence web site lists all the current holders of accreditation under the scheme. There are too many for subtext to count, but very few universities, and those only for the admin of subsections such as information services and libraries - vitally important, of course, but as services to teaching and research, rather than at the sharp end. The ambition to gain CSE accreditation looks like another example of the University’s growing wish to accumulate meaningless gongs. This trend is a distraction from the chief purposes of the University, and subtext suggests we should resist it. ***************************************************** TIME TO CALL TIME ON ZERO HOURS The British Film Institute Archive is a treasure trove which is well worth a look-see. Our interest was sparked recently by a short film transmitted on 26th November 1964. The 'This Week' series of programmes (older subscribers will remember this award-winning series) on ITV broadcast a documentary entitled 'London Dockers'. The subject was the docks industry and the pay and working conditions of the dockers, focusing on the Royal Albert Dock, London. The voice-over states the conditions are more like 1864; the dockers don't know if they will get work that day. The dockers are seen crowding around and selling their labour on the 'stones' (the cobbled entrance to the Royal Albert Dock) to the highest bidder on the 'free call' system. The voice-over states that the system is more like `an oriental bazaar than a modern industry'. A minimum wage, recently raised to £9pw, is guaranteed when no work is available. Fast-forward to the present day, and one cannot help noticing the similarity to the zero hours contracts utilised by the University, only without the guaranteed minimum wage. We do not apologise for returning to this subject again. Universities and colleges are more than twice as likely to employ staff on controversial zero-hours contracts as other workplaces. According to the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS), the largest teaching union in Scotland, some universities give staff "as few employment rights as legally possible". EIS has also uncovered "potential sex discrimination against women" as the majority of zero-hours contract holders are women, with some receiving no occupational sick pay, no occupational maternity and paternity pay, limited pensions, and significantly less annual leave than permanent employees. We know the scale of the problem at Lancaster University but we do not know what this means for individual members of staff and whether such discrimination and illegality is happening here. subtext understands that discussions are due to take place – we suggest sooner rather than later. ***************************************************** PROBATION subtext understands that management are seeking to impose new probation guidelines, and changes to the University's probation procedures for all staff. The justification for this is unclear. This is all the more worrying because, under the University’s recognition agreement, these changes should be the subject of appropriately-constituted negotiations, not consultation. To add fuel to this sudden unnecessary conflagration the current probation guidelines have disappeared (15th November) from the HR website. subtext wonders why this action has been taken. New staff who are within the period of their probation ought to have the right independently to consult the guidelines that govern the probation. Those guidelines are also important to managers who wish to comply with them. The first thing that staff members have done in the past when they want to see whether management is complying is to look at the guidelines. Sometimes management doesn't, and because the guidelines exist the staff member can ask for a correction or redress and, ultimately, win an appeal against dismissal if the guidelines were violated. When the guidelines have been disappeared there are no procedural standards to which management can be held, and no recourse for a staff member on probation. This appears to represent a fundamental challenge to the individual rights of employees. This is not the first time that management has done this sort of thing. subtext recalls that management altered the guidelines about advertising posts, to the disadvantage of staff seeking redeployment. Why does the University do this? Is it a jolly jape to wind folk up? If it is, then it is succeeding. Is it some strange involuntary aspect of University management culture that causes it to act without thinking? Or is it deliberate policy? One can only draw the conclusion that these 'disappearing acts' are indicative of management's approach to discussions i.e. disengagement from the negotiation and consultation process. ***************************************************** GREAT HALL CONCERTS Cabaret on the 14th November.... A specialist in the cabaret style, the singer Mary Carewe came to the Great Hall on 14 November to perform a range of songs written in the first half of the twentieth century, many of them for the Berlin cabaret. Backing was provided by a group of six instrumentalists from Manchester Camerata. The programme included some obvious choices - a couple of Marlene Dietrich numbers, 'Sex Appeal' and 'Falling in Love Again', and 'Mack the Knife', the best-known song from Weill and Brecht’s Die Dreigroschenoper - but also some surprises. One such was the revelation that in 1901 Arnold Schoenberg had been the music director of the company for the literary cabaret Uberbrettl; Carewe performed his song 'Der Genugsame Liebhaber', which was written for that venue. We were also treated to an excerpt from Pierrot Lunaire, one of Schoenberg’s most remarkable compositions. In this cabaret-like work dating from 1911, Schoenberg had already moved away from tonal writing; but few of the audience can have realised beforehand that, ten years before writing it, Schoenberg had worked in cabaret himself. In the second half of the programme we moved to the USA, with songs from the 1930s and 40s by Weill and Gershwin. Mary Carewe is a very versatile singer, and she moved with ease among these different genres. One of the pleasures of hearing these pieces is that the words, by Ogden Nash and Ira Gershwin, are so witty, so it was unfortunate that the instrumental arrangements made the words inaudible to many members of the audience, even though the singer had a mike. This could have been better managed. ... and Jazz on the 21st Last week’s Great Hall concert on 21 November was given by the trio led by pianist Julian Joseph. As a jazz pianist he showed himself to be highly inventive, playing extended improvised pieces lasting in one case almost twenty minutes without becoming the least bit tedious. Indeed, although continuous, this very long item seemed to be divided into movements, almost like a piece of classical music. He has brilliant piano technique, which allows him to play complex improvised music with remarkable accuracy - there are no blitzed notes. Among his other talents, he is a regular broadcaster on jazz subjects for Radio 3 (his radio show Jazz Legends ran from 2000 to 2007). During the evening, when he came to the microphone to announce the next item or to credit the other members of the trio, he came across as quietly thoughtful and rather charming - one can understand why he is a popular broadcaster. The other members of the trio were Mark Mondesir, a very skilled drummer, and an equally skilled bass player whose name we were unable to catch. There was no printed programme - not even a name list - which was unfortunate.
***************************************************** TOPICAL LINKS Another set of critical perspectives on recent developments in the higher education sector in the UK can be found in Stefan Collini’s recent article in the London Review of Books: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v35/n20/stefan-collini/sold-out. Another effect of the UK Border Agency's current exclusion policies on academia: see http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/28/overseas-academics-refused-uk-visas?CMP=twt_gu.
***************************************************** LETTERS Dear Subtext, I was at a meeting convened two (I think) HR directors back, intended to convince us that a four-year term of office for Heads of Department was a good idea. It would give HoDs time to 'see things through', that kind of thing. I pointed out to the then HR honcho that, in the HR world, four years in a single post would be seen as a sign of failure. Someone not moving on in that period would be thought of as lacking. I got extended funny looks in return, as you get when you say something that has deeper significance than you intended. Soon after - well, you've reported how the story unfolds. More seriously (if I may), all Lancaster's ambitions will count for nowt if we don't have the people here to achieve them. I am tempted to say we are a highly-skilled knowledge-intensive organization with specific and demanding human capital requirements that call for an innovative talent management strategy. Yes, that I can come out with such stuff reveals the hidden secret that I and a number of LUMS academic colleagues share, that we are actually members of the professional organizations for HR managers, the CIPD. So, we know HR, and we 'get it' as well. Doing the 'it' is much better than doing 'HR', though, so we should be kind to HR managers past, present and future. And, to avoid trouble, I must sign myself with a line from the episode where Dr Who first encountered Donna: 'This Time It’s Personnel', PhD, MCIPD (full name and address supplied)
***************************************************** The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: Sam Clark, Rachel Cooper (PPR), Mark Garnett, George Green, Ian Paylor, and Martin Widden. |