The end of the line for Alastair Jarvis

This morning, staff and students fighting for pensions and against marketisation woke to the surprising news that Oxford’s vice-chancellor, Louise Richardson, had emailed staff to confirm the University was reversing its position on pensions.

This was all the more spectacular given that only yesterday Oxford’s famed academic self-governance was derailed by 21 ‘loyalists’ who vetoed a debate on the USS issue. However, when the dons left the room in protest – and passed a motion by an overwhelming majority (418-2) to reverse the university’s position in an informal (and obviously non-binding) meeting outside – trouble was up. On Twitter, dons – including senior professors – began to bemoan the destruction of Oxford democracy, and a number began to openly discuss if and how it would be possible to mobilise to remove their vice-chancellor.

The ‘non-debate’ made the national press. Richardson had to act to survive. And she did so.

Universities UK now stands almost alone. Vice-chancellors up and down the country have reversed positions, and the initial consultation survey figure was proved to have been inflated by the inappropriate inclusion of Oxford and Cambridge colleges as if they were themselves universities.

Some VCs have begun to characterise Universities UK – which was once simply the ‘Committee of Vice-Chancellors and Principals’ – as a rogue organisation that they cannot influence.

And that’s without getting into the organisation’s idiotic antics on Twitter.

A botched (put generously, some have said worse) consultation, a contemptuous approach to universities and their staff, an attempt to use negotiations as a ruse to end strike action, and rob staff of their only leverage. And a series of PR disasters that make the eyes water.

That’s the measure of Alastair Jarvis’ tenure as chief executive of Universities UK, and that’s why, now, he must resign.

Following Oxford’s change of position, Universities UK’s plaintive pleas to institutions yesterday to hold the line are worthless. Jarvis has presided over a UUK characterised by sheer, unadulterated incompetence and has triggered a dispute of epic proportions within the higher education sector.

When people look for someone to blame for the current disruption, they shouldn’t look at academics trying to save their livelihoods or rescue the university. They should look at Alastair Jarvis and Dame Janet Beer.

In addition to Jarvis, Beer should undoubtedly also step down and discussions should take place on what body should replace Universities UK, which is clearly in no sense ‘the voice of the Universities’ it claims to be. On a small scale, Labour could signal their intentions if Liverpool’s Metro Mayor Steve Rotherham, former PPS to Jeremy Corbyn, dismisses Beer as his higher education adviser. Given Labour’s steadfast support in the dispute and Beer’s leading role in orchestrating it, she can no longer credibly continue to advise a senior Labour figure.

With Oxford gone, one of the last linchpins in the UUK ranks is removed. Cambridge will now come under intense pressure to do the same. None of this would have been possible without the sustained strike action by UCU members and the courageous solidarity of students, especially those who’ve gone into occupation across the county.

At this critical juncture, UCU must not ask but demand the continuance of the status quo in pension rights, and also demand the resignation of Alastair Jarvis and the reconstitution of UUK.

Because the university deserves better.


5 thoughts on “The end of the line for Alastair Jarvis

  1. Cannot agree more with everything said here. A more egregious example of incompetence and mis-management is hard to imagine. I am surprised he is being given the option to resign – he has brought UUK into disrepute, which should automatically trigger suspension, gardening leave and then termination (surely?!?!). This of course also applies to all the VC’s that have supported this shocking attempt by UUK to materially devalue working conditions for all post-92 academics (and many professional staff) with factually incorrect assumptions. I would also note that the provost of UCL, a key instigator of this move it seems, is now looking increasingly ridiculous in light of the damascene-like conversion of many of these VC’s at other, perhaps more enlightened (and august?) institutions.


    1. Agreed. But “gardening leave” for gross negligence that imposed catastrophic pensions cuts for thousands and thousands of people? I think if he wants it, he should be made to go on strike for it, with 100% pay cuts and further reductions for not working overtime to catch up.

      Universities also need to look at Heads of Schools and Professional Services staff who gleefully ran around imposing strike breaking processes.

      Finally, I hope those staff who did not support strikes, especially those who are union members, and did not have a good reason for participating in the stoppage – of which there are many – need to do some serious self reflection.


    1. I’d disagree with that. I feel many lecturers are on strike precisely because they are opposed to government restrictions on free speech such as Prevent, but of course, as you’ll be aware, unions can’t strike for reasons outside their employees’ terms and conditions. Also I do think it’s reasonable to strike when livelihood is threatened, but that’s a personal view of course.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s