This does NOT constitute legal advice or guidance but reflects our experience with the business cases to date. It is provided to help staff who may have questions or concerns about the process to get a sense of what to expect and how to respond.
The Professional Services Review has been underway for months. Every university service department is being reviewed and a business case (a proposal for changes in structure) being prepared. The rationale presented by the university is two-fold – 1) improving operations through reconfiguring service teams and clarifying roles and functions, 2) reducing costs, which includes staffing.
Business Cases
We have seen a number of business cases so far but some of the larger ones (in terms of the size of the departments) are coming through now.
The format of notifications
A published proposal for change in a given department is communicated directly to the staff of that department. This marks the beginning of formal consultation by the university with affected staff.
These notifications are normally in person and in a group/s. The format includes providing a basic outline verbally of what is proposed, following a script of points that need to be included from an HR perspective. Questions can be raised and staff are free to seek clarification about things there and then.
They can be stressful and the format (verbal) is not ideal for visual learners or neurodivergent staff. Unions are normally notified in advance and can attend as observers and to ensure fair process is followed. Some people bring along a supportive colleague with them. After the meeting each individual receives an email with a written copy of the actual proposal and other information.
Consulting and commenting
At the moment consultation is running to 30 days. Earlier ones for smaller teams were a couple of weeks. Consultation occurs with the individuals affected.
‘Consultees’ are those affected directly by the proposals and their relevant representatives (trade unions).
Note: in this scenario trade unions represent ‘the staff’ as consultees, not just those who are members of the union.
Individual staff, or groups of staff, meet with the lead member of management making the proposal and an HR business partner to discuss the proposals as part of that consultation.
At the end of the consultation period the university will have to consider, show it has considered, and respond to views of consultees. This might result in amendments to the proposals. It is only after consultation, response and presentation of a final business case for approval by the Scrutiny and Redundancy Committee that proposals become a plan of action. We understand this is the earliest point at which notification of termination of a post would occur.
Finding out more about the proposals
The full proposals are shared by AU only with the affected staff and relevant stakeholders (e.g. the unions).
This is happening via setting up specific Teams groups for access by those affected staff. Here a copy of the proposal, job descriptions, and other relevant information is posted that all affected staff have access to.
UCU have called for summary versions to be prepared that remove personally identifying information to enable HoDs and other relevant staff outside of affected teams to understand what is proposed, and if necessary, provide comment.
This should be what happens going forward.
FAQs
There are a series of processes that the university uses to minimise numbers of staff ‘at risk of redundancy’, including matching and slotting, prior consideration, offering voluntary redundancy terms etc.
The FAQs for understanding these restructuring processes are available on the staff intranet under the Vice Chancellor’s section. Here is the link .
This will be updated as issues emerge in the consultations.
Unions are also urging the employer to provide FAQs for specific business cases to avoid the partial sharing of essential and common information that result from just clarifying points in individual 1:2:1 consultations.
Reasonableness test
Consultation has to be meaningful and the employer needs to show it has been. Staff should have the opportunity to discuss ways to reduce or avoid redundancy, understand how roles at risk have been identified, understand what the changes proposed mean for them, etc. to be able to make informed decisions.
Sometimes the unions might consider the consultation period or information to be problematic and prevent staff from reasonably engaging with the consultation (e.g. during periods when many people are on annual leave). Here we have a right to ask the employer to extend the consultation period.
Advice for affected colleagues or those supporting them
Meeting to discuss the plans
You can meet with the person leading your restructure 1:2:1, indeed you have a right to ask for that. However, it can sometimes be worth asking to meet them as a group.
More generally we would encourage staff to meet as groups to discuss things regularly and to ask for feedback or updates from AU as a group. This avoids the situation of one person asking a question and getting an answer and none of the rest of the team knowing about it.
Remember – you have a legal right to be accompanied to any official meeting by another colleague. This might be a union member, but it absolutely does not have to be. It helps to have another person for emotional support, to take notes and observe, to ensure you are treated lawfully and fairly, and sometimes to have critical distance and clarify points or procedures in what might be a stressful situation.
So – Talk to each other. Work collectively. Consider the options. And ASK QUESTIONS.
Questions to ask …
Our experience is that business cases are not always clear or easy to follow, though some are more detailed that others. They tend to be framed as ‘high level’ whereas staff want to know precisely “what does this mean for me, my friends, my team”.
While these seem obvious, we do think the following questions worth pondering early before you meet in a formal consultation setting.
- is it clear to the team what the new structure looks like and is for (its primary functions)?
- does the proposal broadly make sense? i.e. is it clear what the strategic intent is and are there elements you consider helpful?
- as you understand them, are the facts and figures presented in the business case correct?
- based on your understanding of work currently undertaken by the team does this proposal make sense in terms of staff resource/jobs attached to the new structure?
- is it clear to you where you might sit in this new structure?
- where are the main risks associated with the changes proposed?
- i.e. role specific skills, workload, expertise, working relationships, student experience, points of institutional risk, implementation of the changes
- can you identify any reasonable solutions to the risks identified?
- is it clear that alternate structures and solutions to staffing needs have been considered?
- if not, can you identify any?
If the answer is “no” to any of the above it is legitimate for you to seek clarification and to highlight this in the consultation. This might be during the consultation itself (i.e. at a meeting, or by email) or incorporated into your response to it.
Lastly, view the consultation as a process not just a written statement. The more you can clarify early the more precise your specific counter proposals and more effective your outstanding questions can be when put in writing.