The budget cuts announced by Sir Peter Mathieson have been on the lips of staff and students since February 2025. According to the University and College Union (UCU) website: “University management intends to cut expenditure by a staggering £140m, with proposed £90 million savings on staff: equivalent to around 1400-1800 redundancies.” Both the worry about the implications of these cuts and the strikes against them have become an almost integral part of university life, leaving me wondering if industrial action continues to be effective. The members of the UCU on strike seem to be more hopeful: “To withdraw labour is one of many tools, but it is the main tool. Imagine if 10-15 per cent of staff would disappear,” said one of the staff members I spoke to on the picket lines on Tuesday 18th November. Another striking staff member recalled UCU’s success from 2022 when, following a strike as part of a national campaign against pension cuts, the university partially reversed the cuts. “Industrial action is not guaranteed to work, but industrial in-action is guaranteed to lose,” he concluded.
While we stand in solidarity with the striking staff members, a key question comes to mind: how can the budget hole be covered without job cuts and raising tuition fees? As painful as the redundancies would be, are they necessary? The simple answer is no. The university made an operational surplus of £104m in 2022-23 and £25m in 2023-24 and is reported to have £3bn in reserves. At the very least, the administration should sit down with the UCU and develop a better plan for ensuring financial sustainability that does not include such drastic cuts. The university should also limit its capital expenditure plans which are projected at £200m this year, directed mostly at physical infrastructure; while the improvement of infrastructure would, surely, be beneficial, it cannot come at the expense of workplaces.
“We never want to strike, we would much rather be teaching,” said one member of the UCU. “It is key that students understand the action is not directed against them.” While we can all feel some disruption to our learning brought by the ongoing strikes, with classes being cancelled ahead of upcoming exams, this is incomparable to the decrease in student experience and teaching quality that would result from the redundancies. Program and course cuts, fewer and larger tutorial groups, less contact time, less engagement with students’ work, longer waiting times for meetings and email responses: these are just some of the possible consequences.
Standing by the Scottish Parliament, hearing chants like “When our jobs are under attack what do we do? Stand up fight back!” exclaimed to the beat of the drums—followed by speeches not only by UCU representatives, but also by the leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, a Labour MSP, a Staff-Student Solidarity Network member, and the EUSA president—the sense of solidarity was pulsating through the crowd. Yet I felt something was amiss. Student engagement, though it exists, is largely limited. To bring meaningful change to the university, students must build a movement of their own.
To appeal to the university management in a way that might resonate with them: allowing student satisfaction, which already ranks 128th out of 130, to plummet further would be detrimental to the university’s reputation, harming finances in the long-term. We must stand in solidarity with the striking staff and realise that they are not the enemy. Their demands should be our demands too, so that the University can no longer ignore the voices of its staff and student bodies.
Photo by Daniel Ghazi for The Student
Related
“Industrial inaction is guaranteed to lose”: Why solidarity with the UCU remains imperative
The budget cuts announced by Sir Peter Mathieson have been on the lips of staff and students since February 2025. According to the University and College Union (UCU) website: “University management intends to cut expenditure by a staggering £140m, with proposed £90 million savings on staff: equivalent to around 1400-1800 redundancies.” Both the worry about the implications of these cuts and the strikes against them have become an almost integral part of university life, leaving me wondering if industrial action continues to be effective. The members of the UCU on strike seem to be more hopeful: “To withdraw labour is one of many tools, but it is the main tool. Imagine if 10-15 per cent of staff would disappear,” said one of the staff members I spoke to on the picket lines on Tuesday 18th November. Another striking staff member recalled UCU’s success from 2022 when, following a strike as part of a national campaign against pension cuts, the university partially reversed the cuts. “Industrial action is not guaranteed to work, but industrial in-action is guaranteed to lose,” he concluded.
While we stand in solidarity with the striking staff members, a key question comes to mind: how can the budget hole be covered without job cuts and raising tuition fees? As painful as the redundancies would be, are they necessary? The simple answer is no. The university made an operational surplus of £104m in 2022-23 and £25m in 2023-24 and is reported to have £3bn in reserves. At the very least, the administration should sit down with the UCU and develop a better plan for ensuring financial sustainability that does not include such drastic cuts. The university should also limit its capital expenditure plans which are projected at £200m this year, directed mostly at physical infrastructure; while the improvement of infrastructure would, surely, be beneficial, it cannot come at the expense of workplaces.
“We never want to strike, we would much rather be teaching,” said one member of the UCU. “It is key that students understand the action is not directed against them.” While we can all feel some disruption to our learning brought by the ongoing strikes, with classes being cancelled ahead of upcoming exams, this is incomparable to the decrease in student experience and teaching quality that would result from the redundancies. Program and course cuts, fewer and larger tutorial groups, less contact time, less engagement with students’ work, longer waiting times for meetings and email responses: these are just some of the possible consequences.
Standing by the Scottish Parliament, hearing chants like “When our jobs are under attack what do we do? Stand up fight back!” exclaimed to the beat of the drums—followed by speeches not only by UCU representatives, but also by the leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, a Labour MSP, a Staff-Student Solidarity Network member, and the EUSA president—the sense of solidarity was pulsating through the crowd. Yet I felt something was amiss. Student engagement, though it exists, is largely limited. To bring meaningful change to the university, students must build a movement of their own.
To appeal to the university management in a way that might resonate with them: allowing student satisfaction, which already ranks 128th out of 130, to plummet further would be detrimental to the university’s reputation, harming finances in the long-term. We must stand in solidarity with the striking staff and realise that they are not the enemy. Their demands should be our demands too, so that the University can no longer ignore the voices of its staff and student bodies.
Photo by Daniel Ghazi for The Student
Share this:
Like this:
Related