UCU launches campaign to reinstate dismissed lecturer
Share This Article:
A number of lecturers at Bristol University have started a campaign after the controversial dismissal of a Veterinary Sciences Lecturer. Dr Alison Hayman was dismissed on grounds which are "spurious and one-sided", according to a statement from the Reinstate Alison Hayman! campaign, led by a number of University College Union (UCU) members. The statement also says that "UCU is currently fighting Alison’s case". UCU states that Hayman lost her post 'for not securing enough grant monies'. "This is despite the fact that she is described as having made a considerable Research Excellence Framework contribution", the statement says. The campaign, which includes a petition which received over 200 signatures in 24 hours, is being run by a group of lecturers and led by Bristol UCU’s Vice-President, Dr Jamie Melrose, an Assistant Teacher in the School of Politics, Sociology and International Studies (SPAIS). Hayman first took up the position of Lecturer in Connective Tissue Biology in the Department of Clinical Veterinary Science in 2000. Though she had no ambition to rise to the position of Senior Lecturer, in 2007 the University made it compulsory for staff to progress up the academic ladder, or face dismissal. At the same time, however, new criteria were to be enforced for staff to be promoted to Senior Lecturer, largely focused on securing large amounts of external grant money. When Hayman was judged not to have met these, she was placed on "capability" – a period of constant evaluation – with the idea that Bristol University would give her extra help to hit the targets they were setting her. But her account described the procedure as far more stressful than it was supportive. Being on capability meant Hayman was subject to frequent meetings, and constantly had to submit evidence that she was "capable" of getting the desired grants, a situation she described as "demoralising and paralysing". Although Hayman claims to have been awarded £5,000 in funding from the Langford Trust in 2012, she said the University deemed this insufficient, and in 2013 she was put on a stage 2 warning, with another five months to prove herself. And after her next grant application, to the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, failed to net any funding, she was required to attend a stage 3 hearing in July of 2014 – at which she was given three months’ notice and sacked. Hayman, a mother of two who had been the "sole breadwinner" for her family, told Epigram that her dismissal and the years of stressful evaluation that preceded it "put enormous pressure on me and my family. I am currently registered as unemployed with the label of dismissed hanging over me.
“The last 5 years have been an ordeal. I have found the capability process to be an extremely stressful and harassing process”“I was even described as being a former employee on the University of Bristol website, back in August 2014, long before my final date of employment in October 2014”, she explained. Hayman also points to data, allegedly obtained by UCU via Freedom of Information request, showing that between 2010 and 2014, nearly 400 lecturers in the same category as her (non-clinical pathway 1 staff) had in fact secured no grant money at all.
- Article continues below...
- More stories you may like...
- MPs need to come to a conclusion over Britain's nuclear future
- The government "should be doing more" for graduates, says NUS
- Fighting the politics of fear: one man's mission to get you engaged
"Should securing grant applications be the be-all and end-all for “good” research? Doesn't it fly in the face of the principle of academic freedom and the autonomy of research? The pursuit of knowledge dictated to by external bodies (rather than researchers themselves) at all costs?”While Bristol was ranked in the Top 5 in the UK in recent research rankings, some students have recently expressed concerns that research is being prioritised at the expense of teaching. Hayman’s case also seems to have similarities with some recent redundancy issues at Warwick University, where the treatment of academics has been likened to that of City Traders. In one Times Higher Education article, Warwick has been accused of singling out academics for redundancy due to their research income. Purportedly, in November academic staff at Warwick’s medical school were told that anyone who had not secured an average of £90,000 of research income, from a project where they were the principal investigator, or £150,000 of research income, from a project where they were a co-investigator, would be at risk of redundancy. This has caused outrage, with Warwick’s branch of the UCU launching a petition calling on the Vice-Chancellor to overturn the process. In response, a spokesperson for Warwick University said this new criteria had been emplaced since schools had failed to meet prior set financial targets. Additional reporting by Issy May Bull and Alex Evans.