Read on Twitter
UCU NEC: a narrative on the Osime Brown motion remitted Nov 13th from an FE rep of 3 years' NEC experience. Thread
Firstly, let's remember what function the NEC offers for the union. Its core role is 'conducting the union's business between congress meetings'.
Largely, ensuring the business moved at Congress is enacted, approving budgets and dealing with issues arising from the running the union, that aren't dealt with by the number of other sub committees. https://ucu.org.uk/structures
Congress is the core, sovereign decision-making body in our union. This is where the direction and focus for campaigns is set, by motions representing nations, regions and branches, through democratic mandates.
NEC members can submit motions to NEC or any other committee but these will often only represent the representative NEC member and does not need the mandate of a wider body.
Over the past year, Congress has moved significantly less motions than have been submitted to NEC/HEC/FEC (HEC moving the most). There are often c15 member motions at each NEC meeting, on top of all the other business we need to listen to and vote on.
Having heard from UCU members who represent prisons, the raging inequalities and injustices in our criminal justice system consistently discriminate against Black communities and people with learning difficulties.
A solidarity request for members to favour, both financially and in direct comms to members, one case, when there are, sadly, tens of thousands of people and their families who are also facing injustice, is a position I do not find it easy to justify.
There are 63 NEC members: should
each one of us move a similar, quite deserving, case to the NEC, we simply could not function for our members.
each one of us move a similar, quite deserving, case to the NEC, we simply could not function for our members.
I checked this case, and at time of writing had 54 supporting MPs on an EDM which was tabled in Parliament over a month ago, so has publicity and the support of policy makers. Many other cases have no doubt not garnered such support. https://edm.parliament.uk/early-day-motion/57531/justice-for-osime-brown
To correct Jo McNeill's assertion that a donation to the Black University was passed at NEC June 2020, it was not. It was remitted for due diligence checking too and that remittance was proposed by Deepa Driver.
As some have acknowledged, remittance does *not* mean UCU will not support, just that the platform for submitting a donation is checked.
Rather than squabbling about 1 motion, perhaps members' interests might be better served if we deal with collective issues, in more detail, with much more space for discussion, than an already time constrained NEC, with limited speakers with 2mins speaking time.
The Black Members, Disabled, Prisons and Education committees could all work on issues like this together.
Sadly, I hear that the NEC Prisons rep offered to speak at the Black Members' Conference to discuss the issues about over representation of Black prisoners, the lack of positive Black role models working in prison and recruitment into prison ed. The offer was never taken up.
The way this issue has been spun online, suggesting that NEC members are in some way racist/disablist in not voting against remission, is pernicious and dangerous.
To end, support for this case could easily be raised on the UCU activist list, social media groups and other m'ship groups, as we do all the time, and I would happily support. The politicisation of this motion and finger pointing at NEC members does UCU Left supporters no good.
Members would do well to consider who is representing them at national level at the next elections coming soon. Let’s work together for members’ needs and concerns.
