Blog

Posted on

2025 Immigration White Paper: Information for members

On Monday 12 May 2025, the government published an immigration white paper outlining intended changes to the immigration system. As the summary of the proposals demonstrates, these proposals will further marginalize migrants in the UK. Not only will the proposed measures make it more difficult to come and stay in the UK, as well as financially costly (current costs can be viewed here), they also exude a yet further hardening of the anti-immigrant rhetoric the Labour government has adopted wholesale from its Conservative predecessor. The prime minister’s speech to announce the white paper has been widely condemned by trade unions (UCU’s statement) and migrant rights organisations.

As a branch committee we reject the distressing rhetoric and these retrograde measures. We know this is a troubling time for our migrant members and those whose loved ones are migrants. We join you in fervently hoping that many of these proposals will not be turned into law or policy. We will not stand by, nor will UCU at large.

UCU stands firmly in support of migrant members and for a fair and humane immigration system. Migrant members are formally recognised as one of the equality groups the union represents. An annual conference for migrant members is held, which elects a Migrant Members Standing Committee (MMSC) to advise the National Executive Committee [requires myUCU login]. UCU’s Stop the Cuts campaign demands ‘an end to hostile environment policies that make the UK an unwelcoming place for international students’, while UCU’s political campaigning also calls for better treatment of migrant staff. In negotiations with employers over pay and conditions, UCU has pushed to include reimbursement of immigration costs and ensuring pay levels meet government imposed thresholds for visa eligibility in the joint trade union claim. 

The University of Nottingham provides a comparatively generous immigration expenses reimbursement scheme. Our branch’s strong opposition to proposals to weaken the scheme a year ago has ensured it stayed that way. The university’s ambition to be a global university, in our view, means it should do all it can to remove the excessive financial burdens migrant staff and their families face when moving to the UK.

In support of individual members, the MMSC and equality team at UCU head office continuously monitor changes to immigration law and policy. Briefing materials and webinars to help members navigate changes are regularly provided. UCU is supported by qualified immigration lawyers from Bindmans LLP. Members can also request individual legal support on matters of immigration law related to their employment. Before reaching out for legal support or to head office officials, contact the branch for casework support. 
At this time, it is important to stress that however concerning the government’s announcements are, their proposals are not yet in force. The existing rules will continue to apply for now. If you find that the university appears to proceed as if new rules are already in force, for instance if you are needing to renew your visa or become eligible for ILR, please get in touch with the branch immediately so we can get you casework support.

Posted on

e-ballot results and updates

Dear Members

We now have the results from our indicative e-ballot, which closed on Friday. Thank you to all those who have voted: the overwhelming result on a massive turn out is that a clear majority are willing to take action in support of protecting jobs and livelihoods of people at our university.  So heart-warming, thank you, wonderful people. These results mean we can now seek authorisation from our national union to actually ballot.  It is vital you vote in that ballot if it is authorised, again in numbers that the university cannot possibly ignore!  The ballot will again have the 2 Qs on type of action: Strikes and Action Short of a Strike, starting from late July of this academic year (covering Phase 1 of FN) and autumn term of next academic year (when Phase 2 kicks in and CR of Phase 1 is finalised). The ballot paper, on defending jobs at UoN, will detail the types of ASOS which we may call upon you to take, these were identified from the many conversations members had with reps and committee. 

A few further updates and recaps for you: 

As you know, in March, UCU members voted to declare a dispute with the University because the VC refused to rule out compulsory redundancies. During a brief dispute resolution period with us,  VC/UEB would not step back from the planned redundancies. 

Phase 1 update: On 8 April, 2025, management announced Phase 1 of Future Nottingham, involving 258 FTE redundancies of APM staff,  equivalent to 387 roles. These are, in the first instance potentially voluntary, but if need be also includes compulsory redundancies. Voluntary redundancy is being pushed for, at all levels of APM, in professional services and in schools, although the bigger changes (centralisation)  and compulsory redundancies will tip into Phase 2. Beyond not understanding why sending VR letters to all APM staff would cause them to be hugely and unnecessarily saddened (!), roles considered for CR are being published in departments group meetings leading to people in those roles being known more widely as being targeted (unacceptable). Structural changes are not being properly disclosed to the TU negotiating teams (for UCU they are: P, VP, APM Officer & Regional BA ) and some extensive restructuring such as External Relations and CARO, have not been shared properly with Unions or staff.  The risk level of the changes is not being provided nor is why these exact roles are being considered for CR. We are, therefore, strongly contesting their understanding of when the official consultation period has started, it has not! 

Additionally, management have directly said services those people provide to the University will suffer, or others (APM or Academics) may have to pick up (ahm! Workload!! 100% is 100%!).

Phase 2 Update: Plans are already being drawn up and presume will be concluded by the month of May, re which degrees, which research is deemed financially unviable, without understanding what will be lost re knowledge advance and education.  It is highly likely that similar levels of redundancies for academics and technicians will be imposed, again based on top-down analyses rather than involvement of the stakeholders who deliver all the teaching and research. The implications to our UK and global rankings are huge.

We remain of the firm opinion that these cuts are neither necessary nor are they solely externally enforced, considering local financial mismanagement around vanity projects such as Castle Meadow Campus.

We will continue having the regular weekly meetings with management about their plans of implementing redundancies and challenging their vision of a shrinking U of Nottingham. In these meetings, it has also become clear that sustained industrial action is needed to sway management’s strategy.

Unison are also seeking mandate to go into Industrial Dispute, so we may have both unions on strike together. We also plan to hold a very visible 3 union rally soon, to show total solidarity, we will inform on dates. 

In solidarity

Lopa (P), Andrew (APM officer), Andreas (V-P)

On behalf of UoNUCU Branch Committee

Posted on

Joint union transgender solidarity statement

UCU and UNISON at the University of Nottingham are deeply concerned at the widespread, harmful implications of last month’s Supreme Court ruling and subsequent EHRC guidance. At a time of growing transphobic harassment and discrimination across the UK, this ruling is the latest frightening setback for trans rights and freedoms. 

This decision has the direct effect of further removing transgender and non-binary people from public life, and has come about through lobbying by groups aligning themselves with the far-right such as the LGB Alliance and For Women Scotland, bankrolled by a small number of billionaires. Transphobic rhetoric and policy in the UK is being used to create a moral panic in order to distract us from government failures, including a failure to prosecute sexual violence. Our branches remain steadfast in our commitment to defending and promoting trans rights, both at this University and beyond.

That the Supreme Court made this judgement without hearing from a single transgender person is a matter of fact, as is its allowing of interventions and evidence from other, so-called “gender-critical”, groups. A Court is, or should be, bound to hear evidence from all sides in a dispute in order to reach an unbiased and sound judgement.

Trans women have existed in a wide range of societies  for centuries, and science has recognised this. There is no evidence  to support any claim that trans and non-binary people pose a threat to the safety of cis women. The Equalities Act 2010, together with the Gender Recognition Act 2004, have given a legal position for the UK which has operated well through their combined framework for the last 15 years, extending rights to trans and non-trans women and men alike. The ruling itself does not remove the right to the same protections from discrimination as others, as enshrined in the Equalities Act 2010.

We stand in solidarity with trans, non-binary and intersex workers and students and their families at this time, and we will continue to fight for a future when all minorities can live together as one, with respect and dignity.

UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM