The UK’s Best Student Publication
exeposé
FR
E
E
ISSUE 745 17 MAY 2023 exepose.com @Exepose
THE UNIVERSITY OF EXETER’S INDEPENDENT STUDENT NEWSPAPER SINCE 1987
Marking boycott sparks concerns around potential graduation delays
Exeter student and Just Stop Oil protestor talks direct action Page 6
Leah Jamieson on the Pride and Prejudice* (*Sort of) Tour Page 18
Megan Ballantyne, Joshua Hughes and Oliver Lamb Editors and Deputy Editor
T
In conversation with: Don Boyd Page 22
Images (top to bottom): Megan Ballantyne, Mihaela Bodlovic, Courtesy of Phil Wickham, Curator of the Bill
HE ongoing UCU assessments and marking boycott has left many students and staff concerned about the potential for delays to graduations and the inefficacy of potential alternative measures which the University may implement The boycott follows a series of strikes last term over pay, pensions and working conditions. According to the UCU, real terms pay for academic staff has fallen by 25 per cent since 2009, and last year’s pensions cuts amounted to, on average, 35 per cent. Members of the faculty voiced their concerns around their current working conditions to Exeposé. When asked about participating in the boycott, one respondent stated that they are being “constantly ignored and infantilised” by their employers, which has led to them using their “most extreme tactics”. Another staff member commented that they “would like to participate” but were unable to “afford half pay during the boycott.” In regards to the rumoured use of external markers, or the suggestion that students may be provided with grades without
their work being marked, one staff member stated that they haven’t “heard anything at all” but that they wouldn’t approve of any measures including “emergency procedures without marking students’ work.” They further stated that the University is being “incredibly disrespectful to students” who “deserve to have their hard work taken seriously.” Exeposé were also able to sit down with Exeter UCU President, Alex Pritchard to discuss the boycott. Addressing rumours that alternative markers may be brought in by the University to ensure students’ work is marked on time, Prichard stated that this is “probably unworkable.” He went on to explain that “the exam boards will be held sometime towards the end of May, beginning of June, and so they [the Univesity] won’t really know categorically who’s been involved with this until then. So drafting in people to do marking is going to be really difficult for them to administer because they don’t know who they [the boycotting staff] are. They simply don’t know which modules this applies to.” When asked whether staff thought the boycott would affect students’ graduations, respondents suggested that “it’s hard to see that it won’t” unless the University “resolve the dispute promptly.” They suggested that the University will either “graduate students who haven’t had their work marked
… or they will have to be postponed for the foreseeable future.” Another respondent also suggested that the University may well have to push back students’ graduations. Speaking to final year students’ concerns around graduation delays as a result of the boycott, Prichard emphasised that “students aren’t not going to graduate. The question is, when will they graduate? And that is down to the University. We could quite easily call this off. Marking could be done by the end of May. We could extend and push back exam boards and you’d all be graduating in July. This could be called off tomorrow if the University wanted to. But they’re refusing to negotiate.” Prichard suggested that if alternative measures were taken by the University to prevent delays to graduation, “It would, of course, undermine your degrees, because one of the reasons that you come here… is that you come to this university to work with the world-leading academics that we’ve gathered here. And so if you’re not having your work marked by those people, your degree is being devalued. So the question is: do you want a devalued degree or a late one? And I think that you’d get a late one under the marking and assessment boycott, and you’d get a rubbish one underneath the University’s proposals.” Prichard also addressed the potentially illegal action the University is suggesting it
will take against staff who participate in the boycott. “Employers are within their rights legally to deduct pay or withhold pay for partial performance of contractual obligations. They’re threatening 50 per cent deductions for marking… when marking only takes place for, around three or four weeks a year. Of course, they’re not communicating with us. So they’ve made their policy clear and we told them we think it’s disproportionate and punitive, and also disciplinary, and that makes it illegal in many respects. And they contested that and just reaffirmed their commitment to protecting students.” Due to the timing of the boycott and staff payment schedules, Prichard did go on to state that “to my knowledge, no one’s had any deductions [thus far].” Staff also emphasised that the University had not been communicative enough with staff and students. One stated “the ball is in the University’s court” with regards to continued negotiations. They suggested that the University is “threatening staff salaries” and “refusing to end the dispute” that staff would like a “positive outcome” to. Continued on page 4