University sparks jobs row (From The Argus)

I was an undergraduate at Sussex back in the 90s ... the various facilities, aside from the teaching that is, were fantastic really.

Why the need for change?

mimseycal wrote:
I was an undergraduate at Sussex back in the 90s ... the various facilities, aside from the teaching that is, were fantastic really.

Why the need for change?

The secretary has said it is not due to cost but to increase quality, so we can be certain it IS due to cost.

After the 100+ redundancies of faculty recently and the closing of whole sections of Sussex - it all sounds like it's going downhill fast there.
Why are they so much worse off than Brighton Uni?

Impartial? wrote:
After the 100+ redundancies of faculty recently and the closing of whole sections of Sussex - it all sounds like it's going downhill fast there.
Why are they so much worse off than Brighton Uni?

Same reason we are back in recession. They are cutting all of our assets back to save money while ignoring the fact that our assets are what are needed to run a University. This is what happens when you let ruthless businessmen run an academic institution.

More information is available on the "Stop the privatization of sussex university services" facebook page.
https://www.facebook
.com/groups/40708032
5992943/?notif_t=gro
up_r2j

As someone who has studied and worked on the campus for many years here is my question to the University.
Surely the University is a 'brand' it is selling the 'student experience' to potential students, it makes up part of the national survey of further education establishments. How is the University going to be able to keep a high quality of 'student experience' across the campus if they have sold it off to someone else? They will no longer have control over their student residences, catering provisions (a major controversy in the past as they were deemed to be crap and they have recently taken this in house to combat this but are now going to sell it off again?!), the maintenance of the buildings and the big long list of services which are effected by this.

Another concern is how is the University is physically going to operate when half of it is run by another organisation? How will they communicate? The housing office (who allocate campus housing) will be university run but the conference centre and campus residences will be run by someone else, they work so closely together right now but in the future they will be run by different people with different agendas. The company coming in to take all of this over will have ONE priority and that will be making money not making the student experience something special (which is something I loved as a student at Sussex and made me choose the University over others).

I fully support the staff at the University and I believe that the registrar is making a big mistake. Apparently (this is only rumour as I have no facts) the registrar did this at another University and it didn't work, they have now taken back these services in house. Perhaps someone can research this and post their findings?

Save Sussex Services! Help these people keep their job security and working conditions.

Shabens. The uni will create a contract with the outsourced company to deliver the requirements you talk about. Current staff will probably be TUPEd across so you won't see any change externally although the staff would only have their T&Cs protected for two years.
It's common practice and can deliver significant savings and drive innovation and improvement if the contracts are well written and good contractors are used.
Sadly, the world has moved on outside the uni campus.

Outsourcing works very well for huge numbers of co.'s and their customers. As long as the uni choose a reputable, experienced co., the service design meets the needs of the stakeholders and the contract is incentivised around delivery, all should be fine. Can't see the issue at all.

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Shabens. The uni will create a contract with the outsourced company to deliver the requirements you talk about. Current staff will probably be TUPEd across so you won't see any change externally although the staff would only have their T&Cs protected for two years.
It's common practice and can deliver significant savings and drive innovation and improvement if the contracts are well written and good contractors are used.
Sadly, the world has moved on outside the uni campus.

Rubbish, The World has moved on for the worse.
We have a drought because our private water companies have asset stripped our reservoirs.

We have unaffordable train fares and nowhere to sit because the rail companies care about the share holders, not the passengers.

Our army infrastructure (all the barracks and accomodation) were quietly sold to the chinese about 10 years ago, and now we rent them back at a premium.

I could go on and on with these kind of examples

I have worked as a postdoctoral researcher at Sussex for about 10 years now. For example, they sacked our cleaners and took on contract cleaners. Now literally, out labs are never, ever cleaned. We have to empty our own bins (although they get paid to do it) in case it is dangerous for them (it's ok if it's dangerous for us). Sometimes small things get stolen, that's how we know they are still there. I don't blame them really, they have no employment rights, no recourse to the university and are probably on minimum wage while some public school shister in a shiny suit pockets all the cash. That's the "progressive" world you want is it Maxwell's Ghost? Life is short, we all need to make the most of it while we are on the planet without exploiting each other. This kind of thinking needs to be reprogrammed for us to survive in a decent society.

Max_Normal wrote:

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Shabens. The uni will create a contract with the outsourced company to deliver the requirements you talk about. Current staff will probably be TUPEd across so you won't see any change externally although the staff would only have their T&Cs protected for two years.
It's common practice and can deliver significant savings and drive innovation and improvement if the contracts are well written and good contractors are used.
Sadly, the world has moved on outside the uni campus.

Rubbish, The World has moved on for the worse.
We have a drought because our private water companies have asset stripped our reservoirs.

We have unaffordable train fares and nowhere to sit because the rail companies care about the share holders, not the passengers.

Our army infrastructure (all the barracks and accomodation) were quietly sold to the chinese about 10 years ago, and now we rent them back at a premium.

I could go on and on with these kind of examples

I have worked as a postdoctoral researcher at Sussex for about 10 years now. For example, they sacked our cleaners and took on contract cleaners. Now literally, out labs are never, ever cleaned. We have to empty our own bins (although they get paid to do it) in case it is dangerous for them (it's ok if it's dangerous for us). Sometimes small things get stolen, that's how we know they are still there. I don't blame them really, they have no employment rights, no recourse to the university and are probably on minimum wage while some public school shister in a shiny suit pockets all the cash. That's the "progressive" world you want is it Maxwell's Ghost? Life is short, we all need to make the most of it while we are on the planet without exploiting each other. This kind of thinking needs to be reprogrammed for us to survive in a decent society.

I look forward to reading your plans for reforming society and how you intend to "reprogramme" society's thinking. Will the whole world feature in your plans, or just the UK?

The armed forces had to civilianise and outsource positions thirty years ago when modern warfare relied more on technology. You could not take on servicemen and train them to learn computer programming for example when private companies were competing with the top brains to produce and provide such services.
A small in house organisation cannot provide development and innovation and cost savings in the same way a service provider sometimes can.
That's why companies go to the wall.
Other unis may take on a contractor who provides all sorts of extras for the campus which could leave Sussex way behind.
I am not saying its right or wrong. However, I do feel for staff who usually don't want to be TUPEd. Also you may realise that outsourcing means the public sector does not have to take any new employees on paying them a public sector pension. It's cheaper to outsource.

Recollect the state of hospital floors when the cleaning was outsourced?

Not every outsourcing is necessarily progress.

Unsurprisingly for someone named Maxwell's Ghost, you have missed the point that their membership of the university's pension scheme will end - still, that will protect the scheme for those higher earners who are still allowed to contribute to it.
On the issue of "contacts ... well written", they are built on a specification that has been fully defined and detailed - how this is possible without even speaking to the consumers of the product (the students) requires a remarkable leap of imagination that Maxwells Ghost might possess, but the senior management at the University most assuredly don't - the danger implicit in this is that students will become disenchanted by the Sussex experience, and vote with their student loans (and their future potential financial endowments) - the security arrangements at Sussex (downsized a few years ago) have already been the subject of considerable complaint, and even the most efficient outsourced management in the world is not going to be able to make such limited resources stretch further, short of introducing cuts in the length of the current 24 hour day and 7 day week.
As in the outside world the staff at Sussex have participated in the process of improving efficiency and finding cost savings, and have experienced a decrease in their real pay, but hey, we're all in this together aren't we ?

re Maxwells Ghost and pensions - and my delayed posting above - I note that you have now identified the pensions issue.

Running an academic institution like a business is a sensible as underwater hang-gliding. They are incompatible. If you do choose to run it as a business, there are a couple of business models you can choose: One is to nurture it's staff and speculate to accumulate, this is why Brighton University continues to thrive. One is cut cut cut to keep the books looking good while taking home a 6-figure salary because you are supposed to be a business genius who will sort out the problem. I think this helps answer an earlier question. As to Busterblister, I don't quite think you understand, you don't have to be a ranting leftist to see that most of society is already sick of greedy businessmen running the show, along with self-serving politicians and the bankers who now own all my 5-year old childs savings (as well as quite a lot of your money I expect). Society does not need to change, it just needs to change the corrupt people who are causing all the damage. The lack of enthusiasm for all of the major parties in the recent council elections, coupled with the rather surprising successes for the Respect Party tend to bear this out. Things will change, albeit slowly. Perhaps we need to get people who actually know what they are talking about running things, not greedy shortsighted businessmen dipping into Universities, Hospitals potentially the Police, our Banking system, without a care for the future. If you can't see that this is happening, you are part of the problem.

Max_Normal wrote:
Running an academic institution like a business is a sensible as underwater hang-gliding. They are incompatible. If you do choose to run it as a business, there are a couple of business models you can choose: One is to nurture it's staff and speculate to accumulate, this is why Brighton University continues to thrive. One is cut cut cut to keep the books looking good while taking home a 6-figure salary because you are supposed to be a business genius who will sort out the problem. I think this helps answer an earlier question. As to Busterblister, I don't quite think you understand, you don't have to be a ranting leftist to see that most of society is already sick of greedy businessmen running the show, along with self-serving politicians and the bankers who now own all my 5-year old childs savings (as well as quite a lot of your money I expect). Society does not need to change, it just needs to change the corrupt people who are causing all the damage. The lack of enthusiasm for all of the major parties in the recent council elections, coupled with the rather surprising successes for the Respect Party tend to bear this out. Things will change, albeit slowly. Perhaps we need to get people who actually know what they are talking about running things, not greedy shortsighted businessmen dipping into Universities, Hospitals potentially the Police, our Banking system, without a care for the future. If you can't see that this is happening, you are part of the problem.

Just some quick points:

Only two levers in business - save money / make more money.

Voter apathy is down to lack of choice. When we all grew up we knew what the parties stood for on principle, now they offer to stand for what we believe in at focus groups and whatever is trending on twitter at any given time. Since Tony Blair made new Labour the wet version of the Tory party, there is very little choice. God help us all though if the Respect party is the answer to our issues.

As for the bankers owning your savings, lloyds and RBS have repaid their loans. One thing that is rarely mentioned about the banking crisis is that many individuals lived beyond their means and had no way of repaying their loans. Much of the economy has been based on easy credit, it was always going to end in tears for some.

What damage? When I grew up the country was uncompetitive, interest rates were high, taxes were pehnomenal and drove wealth creators out of the UK, the Unions held us all to ransom and the Labour Party were systematically destroying the UK. Everything is better now, but not perfect.

Very good points Max_Normal. I would advise against challenging the tory morons on this thread. As ever, avoid arguing with such stupid people - they'll only drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

As an employee and a union member all I can really advise is that the world and customer demand is bigger than an individual or even a country.
It's now a case of chasing salaries to ensure you look after your own financial needs into old age.
Perhaps the posters on here should consider why the uk has more unemployed graduates than any other country including Spain which has 50 per cent youth unemployment.
You think small get small.

Popped vanity implant wrote:
Very good points Max_Normal. I would advise against challenging the tory morons on this thread. As ever, avoid arguing with such stupid people - they'll only drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.

As you're quoting someone else, try these from Winston Churchill:

"It is a good thing for an uneducated man to read books of quotations"

"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy"

"As you're quoting someone else..."

Yes, well done you - that's generally the idea with quotes.

I agree with Churchill on both points and you of all people should be reading books of quotations.
How's the Hungry Caterpillar going?

Hungry?

Popped vanity implant wrote:
"As you're quoting someone else..."

Yes, well done you - that's generally the idea with quotes.

I agree with Churchill on both points and you of all people should be reading books of quotations.
How's the Hungry Caterpillar going?

I think you're missing the point with your trolling - it's meant to make ME look like an idiot.

I think you are both missing the point of these threads. They are meant to be addressing the issues raised by the article. Not, contrary to your obvious limited understanding, a means of scoring points of each other.

mimseycal wrote:
I think you are both missing the point of these threads. They are meant to be addressing the issues raised by the article. Not, contrary to your obvious limited understanding, a means of scoring points of each other.

Have already made my opinion clear on the article. Now just responding to points made.

Well said Mimseycal.

I praised an impressive comment and warned about the futility of rising further to any tory cobbling. This stimulated a response quoting Winston Churchill. Mmm.

Suggesting RBS and Lloyds paid back all the money that they received and "everything is better, but not perfect" and other comments about outsourcing seems to whisper to Thatcher's toxic legacy of greed that put in motion the destruction of the UKs manufacturing base, as levels of unemployment climbed while shiny-suited inbreds instead directed greater effort to financial service swindling and the 'age of the management consultant'. Meanwhile some banking heroes seemed to start imagineering money, could this be because insider-trading had to be kept only as an occassional sweetener? I think so.

The privatisation / outsourcing model being praised and utilised on such occasions has so often been shown as disastrous and yet it is once again roled-out and defended here. It's a central component of the kitchen-sink economics generally spouted by incompetent managers who can't see anything as functional unless at least one peasant is getting a bit more shafted than before.

So, in part thanks to short-sightedness of such privatisations and outsourcing, we seem to be heading towards a future with ever-larger warehouses in the East Midlands to keep the UK in imported tinned-food whilst tory oiks or labour loons look for anything that is left over to downsize, privatise or just sell at a loss.

Popped vanity implant wrote:
Well said Mimseycal.

I praised an impressive comment and warned about the futility of rising further to any tory cobbling. This stimulated a response quoting Winston Churchill. Mmm.

Suggesting RBS and Lloyds paid back all the money that they received and "everything is better, but not perfect" and other comments about outsourcing seems to whisper to Thatcher's toxic legacy of greed that put in motion the destruction of the UKs manufacturing base, as levels of unemployment climbed while shiny-suited inbreds instead directed greater effort to financial service swindling and the 'age of the management consultant'. Meanwhile some banking heroes seemed to start imagineering money, could this be because insider-trading had to be kept only as an occassional sweetener? I think so.

The privatisation / outsourcing model being praised and utilised on such occasions has so often been shown as disastrous and yet it is once again roled-out and defended here. It's a central component of the kitchen-sink economics generally spouted by incompetent managers who can't see anything as functional unless at least one peasant is getting a bit more shafted than before.

So, in part thanks to short-sightedness of such privatisations and outsourcing, we seem to be heading towards a future with ever-larger warehouses in the East Midlands to keep the UK in imported tinned-food whilst tory oiks or labour loons look for anything that is left over to downsize, privatise or just sell at a loss.

Still channeling the spirit of Wolfie Smith I see. "Power to the people!"

This site also needs an ignore function.....