‘Macho’ approach criticised by union as Cardiff University pushes modified cuts programme

Martin Shipton

Cardiff University has been accused of continuing its ‘macho’ approach to cost cutting after insisting that a further 69 jobs must go.

The university has been in crisis since January this year, when its Executive Board announced proposals to shed 400 academic jobs and close five of its Schools.

Members of the University and College Union voted for a programme of industrial action including strikes and a student assessment boycott.

The university modified by its proposals, stating that no compulsory redundancies would be imposed in 2025, but it has now issued an update warning of the need for further cuts.

Market demands

A statement issued by Vice Chancellor Wendy Larner and the University Executive Board (UEB) to all staff on June 9 said: “As set out in our message on Friday, we are now sharing the Our Academic Future business case we will take to Council. It sets out how we propose to achieve academic and financial sustainability while supporting the ambitions of our strategy, Our future, together. This means we would become a slightly smaller university, refocused around core academic strengths, ready to leverage new opportunities and respond to changing market demands.

“The business case has been shaped by you, and will help ensure the university is fit for a future in which our community play a key role in delivering cultural and economic benefit for Cardiff, Wales and the world.

“You shared your thoughts and feedback in different ways, including the 54 alternative proposals submitted; during five UEB all-staff webinars, where 730 questions were asked and answered; 33 meetings with staff in affected schools; 520 emails received to newid-change; 12 collective consultation meetings with trade unions and 29 College collective consultation meetings with trade unions; 357 individual consultation meetings.

“At the start of this process we were clear that the proposals could, and indeed should, change. The business case gives detail on how the original proposals have developed, and a short summary of the plans is provided below.

“We do not underestimate the impact these plans and the consultation process has had and continues to have on colleagues. Wellbeing support is available to you, and as outlined in last week’s message we are continuing to seek opportunities to enhance this support offer, in partnership with trade unions.”

Original proposals

The statement then listed examples of how the original proposals had changed:

We plan to retain Music and Modern Languages at Cardiff, although at a reduced and rationalised scale in a new School of Global Humanities;

Following an alternative proposal we plan to retain Nursing at Cardiff, keeping all three of the degree programmes, but with smaller cohorts;

A number of Schools were taken out of scope during the process, having met their academic staff reduction targets or as a result of alternative proposals;

The initial target for reduction in academic staff FTE was 400. Acceptance of alternative proposals that involved retaining staff capacity to deliver Cardiff-based programmes and new enterprises such as our Transnational Education partnerships reduced the target to 220 FTE. 151 academic staff FTE have left the university voluntarily, meaning that we now need 69 academic staff FTE to deliver the 220 FTE target.

Examples of original proposals retained include:

Ceasing undergraduate and postgraduate programmes in Ancient History and Religion and Theology;

The decision to merge certain Schools, reducing the number of our Schools from 24 to 16;

The decision to increase student: staff ratios to achieve financial sustainability, recognising that this will mean changes in teaching practice to preserve and improve the student experience.

“If approved, these plans will deliver a gross saving per annum of £20m and a net saving of £14.1m; in combination with the wider Voluntary Severance scheme, deliver gross savings of £28.4m and net savings of £22.5m.

“These savings do not fully close the financial gap, and further work will be required, including diversifying our income streams and reducing professional services and estates costs.”

‘Premature’

A Cardiff University and College Union spokesperson said: “We have very serious concerns about the way that the University is rushing through these premature and ill-justified plans to restructure the University. It is welcome that under threat of industrial action and massive staff, student, and community opposition the University Executive Board has U-turned on some of its more damaging proposals. But our members remain deeply disappointed that, despite hundreds of meetings with staff, management are still not fully hearing our concerns and are ploughing ahead in the same old macho way.

“The rosy picture painted by management today ignores many serious problems. For instance: More than 400 staff currently remain in scope for redundancy; whole schools and programmes are still being needlessly axed (including Ancient History, Religion, German, Portuguese, and Italian); others remain a shadow of their former selves because of staff lost to voluntary redundancy; departments are being bundled together in hurried, untransparent, and risky ways; professional services support staffing is in chaos because of a separate, equally damaging restructuring exercise; there is an epidemic of poor staff mental health caused by the mismanagement of these cuts; they are jeopardising our futures by linking their change plans to risky and hastily-developed transnational education schemes like Cardiff University Kazakhstan (CUK); and all of this exposes the University, and the student experience, to a range of very grim risks.

“We fully agree that change is needed to keep the University financially viable, but we continue to make the case that this kind of short, high-risk timeline for change is avoidable and that we have the resources to restructure in a more measured and prudent fashion. Instead of passing these proposals on the nod, Council should do its job and recommend a more reasonable period of reform, reducing risks to the University’s reputation, academic sustainability, staff wellbeing, and student satisfaction.”