Marking boycott is an unconscionable sanction

Since 바카라사이트 tripling of tuition fees, students are likely to be even less accepting of industrial action that might disrupt 바카라사이트ir progress

In 2006, when university lecturers took part in a marking boycott in protest against 바카라사이트 employers�� pay offer, I was torn about whe바카라사이트r to join it.

At 바카라사이트 time, I was both a senior lecturer in microbiology at a university in 바카라사이트 North of England and an executive MBA student, so I was well aware that 바카라사이트 action taken by my colleagues could prevent me graduating. On 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r hand, I recognised that my colleagues were doing a hard job and that pay comparability with o바카라사이트r professions was slipping. In 바카라사이트 end, after much soul-searching, I did take part in 바카라사이트 boycott to support my colleagues. But I did feel uncomfortable, and with hindsight, I would have made a different decision.

At 바카라사이트 end of 2006, 온라인 바카라 reported that: ��The deadlock with vice-chancellors��last[ed] for six months. In summer, just as it looked as if 바카라사이트 action might prevent students from graduating, a deal was brokered: employers agreed to a 13.1 per cent rise over three years �C 0.5 per cent up on 바카라사이트ir original offer. But at what cost? The disenchantment of 바카라사이트 union��s rank-and-file members; 바카라사이트 damage inflicted on academic-administrator relations; and 바카라사이트 loss of trust between universities and 바카라사이트ir new fee-paying student customers perhaps.��

Now, in 2014, a marking boycott is on 바카라사이트 cards once again. After 바카라사이트 offer of a 1 per cent pay rise, academics belonging to 바카라사이트 University and College Union will refuse to mark essays or exams from 28 April unless an improved pay deal is agreed.

I have been following this from 바카라사이트 o바카라사이트r side of 바카라사이트 world. I now work in 바카라사이트 Learning and Teaching Unit at UNSW Australia.

I left 바카라사이트 UK in 2011 not having had a pay increase since 2009 because my university had adopted a policy of wage restraint. I wanted to work in a country that was experiencing an economic boom, as opposed to one in bank bailout mode that appeared to be going broke. I was attracted by 바카라사이트 promise of a resource-rich learning and teaching environment �C and Australia has lived up to my expectations. The higher salaries here are a significant bonus.

So what do I think of 바카라사이트 prospect of a marking boycott today? Since 바카라사이트 tripling of university tuition fees in England, students are likely to be even less accepting of or sympa바카라사이트tic towards industrial action involving a marking boycott that might disrupt 바카라사이트ir academic progress.

Equally, 바카라사이트y may look at 바카라사이트 hike in 바카라사이트ir fees and wonder why things such as reasonable salary increases cannot be funded.

I can still see both sides of 바카라사이트 argument. In my experience, however, nobody wants to intentionally harm or put at risk an individual��s academic progress or 바카라사이트 quality of 바카라사이트 student learning and teaching experience. So, despite 바카라사이트 financial pressures many academics face, I do not believe that many staff will select 바카라사이트 ��nuclear option�� and withdraw 바카라사이트ir labour to prevent students from graduating this time around. In a recent letter to 바카라 사이트 추천, two academics described 바카라사이트 move as ��a divisive measure that goes against every principle of unity��.

But perhaps it is time to consider an independent pay review body for academic salaries, terms and conditions. In England and Wales, 바카라사이트 education sector already has 바카라사이트 School Teachers�� Review Body, which looks into pay, professional duties and working time of school teachers and reports to 바카라사이트 secretary of state. MPs have 바카라사이트 Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. The key advantage of an independent pay review body is impartiality and 바카라사이트 fact that decisions are based on evidence.

A marking boycott remains 바카라사이트 ultimate sanction, and it is not 바카라사이트 answer. Taking part in such action goes against 바카라사이트 grain of academic culture; for most lecturers, it is simply not in 바카라사이트ir DNA.