Collective Consultation Meeting

Wednesday 8 July 2026

Joint report, UCU, UNISON, UNITE

This meeting had an open agenda and enabled the Trade Unions to pick up previous lines of discussion and to raise new ones. 

We began by discussing the university’s finances; the Chief Financial Officer had sent apologies and negotiators met with her a few days later. The TUs organised their questions about financial decisions, assumptions and forecasts into two themes: transparency and understanding, and specific questions. On transparency and understanding, the TUs noted they were receiving a huge number of questions about finances on a wide range of topics. These range from Q2 forecast jumps in non-pay costs, breakdown of CapEx, details of cashflow position and cost-of-change, to the justification for the £5,200 per person cost in the Voluntary Fractionalisation and the modeling of student number assumptions in the longer term. 

Recognising that it was a complex area, we requested further comms to the university community about the institution’s finances and the establishment of a working group on the topic. The TU’s shared the view that there seemed to be enough flexibility in the finances to extend the time frame for consultation and feedback, and to meet our demand that CRs be ruled out until 31st July 2027.

The TUs raised the question of the recruitment of the Deputy VC role which will become vacant in October 2026. We requested that the role either be suspended or that it be filled internally. We laid out the rationale that had been raised across campus by members, referring to proposed job losses, the hiring freeze, the necessary payroll savings, and the need for Sussex-specific expertise at this critical time. 

We then discussed the proposals for a Voluntary Permanent FTE Reduction scheme. The TUs expressed appreciation for the drafting and circulation of this proposal. We noted that launching such a scheme had generally been received positively, but that members had many questions about the specifics in the proposals. Everyone recognised this is a complex piece of work to undertake. The TUs noted that our formal response to the scheme would be in our submission at the end of collective consultation, but offered a few preliminary views on themes that were emerging from speaking to members. 

We noted that 0.2FTE  was too high for minimum reduction, and that 0.1 as a minimum would gain more support, and potentially lead to greater savings. This would also be more useful for colleagues considering the scheme who are on lower salaries or are already fractional. The TUs recognised why the word ‘permanent’ had been included in the proposal in relation to cashflow forecasts, but asked for reviews to be scheduled which would enable those who had reduced their FTE to restore their hours before any other route to increasing a division or department’s FTE was taken. Examples were given from other institutions. 

On the topic of ring fencing, the distribution of the savings from VPFR, and the interaction of VPFR with VR, everyone agreed this was an extremely complex process. We considered what might happen if units didn’t achieve the savings target, or if they over-saved, through VPFR, as well as how smaller pools/units at risk or with higher proposed FTE reductions in the BCD might be able to benefit from the scheme. There was a view that the easier to understand and administer the scheme, the more likely it was to deliver. The TUs agreed to discuss with members further, but will aim for simplicity, clarity and achievability in proposals. 

The TUs also acknowledged the proposal to calculate any VR payment on the basis of pre-VPFR salary, and requested that the duration of this commitment be extended. 

The TUs raised the issue of those who had been refused VL2025 but were now at risk. 

UET agreed to come back on this point. 

TUs again raised the possibility of re-opening a new, untargeted VL scheme available to all staff and all parties agreed to consider this in more detail at the next meeting. 

UET clarified that consultation was still ongoing and all proposals would be considered.