CEFA

We have redacted all names, leaving some job roles for clarity. You can find highlights of the most crucial extracts from these minutes here and minutes from meeting one are here: Friday 17th September 2021.

1              Welcome and apologies for absence

1.1           [VC] welcomed all the committee members especially the new members who have just joined LGBT+MSC.

1.2           [VC] was chairing the meeting as [Chair] was attending another meeting.  

1.3           There were no apologies for absence

2              Minutes of meeting of 17 September 2021

2.1           Minute 1.2 should read apology was received from [VC] of [institution] not [institution].

2.2           Minutes 4.1 should read [VC] deferred [Chair] to be chair not [VC] did not wish to be the chair.

2.3           The draft minutes were AGREED as a true record with the above amendments.

2.3           The draft minutes were AGREED as a true record with the above amendments.

3              Matters Arising

3.1          At the last meeting it was agreed to send out a survey as some institutions are employing gender critical consultants to conduct equality work. 

3.2           It had been agreed to raise the issue of gender critical consultants being employed in certain institutions at the Equality Committee and to find out if a broader survey could be carried out. This idea was not taken forward by the Equality Committee.

3.3           [ESO] outlined a few broad areas for a survey which would go out to all LGBT+ members. They were:

·       Monitoring LGBT+ visibility.

·       Examples of LGBT+ inclusion in curriculum. 

·       International work would look at whether LGBT+ inclusion is part of international recruitment, whether LGBT+ inclusion is part of induction of overseas students and international relations with universities in different countries.

·       Is LGBT+ inclusion part of equality management initiatives and whether consultants brought into institutions are or are not LGBT+ inclusive?

·       Does the institution liaise with LGBT+ organisations as there is concern that some institutions are not engaging with Stonewall?  

3.4           The aim of the survey would be to get a snapshot of LGBT+ inclusion in various institutions, as well as whether equality consultants being employed who are not LGBT+ inclusive. 

3.5           Suggestions included:

·       asking about the visibility of LGBT+ presence in senior management teams and their impact, as some institutions breaking links from Stonewall are actually LGBT staff with equality remit in senior management roles. 

·       the survey should be structured so that many questions can be answered quickly but other ones require more in-depth response. The in-depth ones could be taken to the branch equality officer/s.

3.6           It was AGREED that [ESO] will produce the questions for the survey and circulate them to LGBT+MSC. The survey will then be circulated. It was AGREED any results from the survey will be an agenda item at the next meeting.

4              Chair’s business

4.1           [VC] wanted to commemorate [redacted] and her work, as it will be two years since her passing.

4.2           It was AGREED that [CM1] will be Vice Chair for 2022.

5              Committee Secretary’s report

5.1           The language in use CPD has been very popular and the take up has been excellent.

5.2           The aim is to develop a CPD around hetero and cis normativities within institutions.

5.3           Both the LGBT+ members conference and the LGBT+ research conference ran successfully.

5.4           UCU supported TUC’s submission to the Government’s conversion therapy consultation. The government is trying to reduce the scope in a way that is similar to their approach to Gender Recognition Act reform.

5.5           An email will be sent to peer reviewers for Equality Research Conference which will take place online in May 2022.

6              TUC LGBT+ Workers Committee

6.1          [CM3] gave an overview of the report. TUC LGBT+ Workers committee strongly supports Stonewall, despite being critical of charter marks.

6.2           TUC have been working with [redacted]. The TUC LGBT+ Committee were sceptical about working with [redacted]. One LGBT+MSC member pointed out that [redacted] espouses neo liberal views and having him on board is regressive rather than progressive.

6.3           A draft response to the government consultation on conversion therapy has been circulated.

6.4           TUC LGBT+ Conference will be around June/July tied in with London Pride in 2022. The committee is going to provide more support to UK Black Pride.

6.5           There was a vacancy for a black member on the LGBT+ TUC workers committee. Unions were asked to submit nominations. It was NOTED that [CM3] will encourage smaller unions to nominate a black LGBT+ member to be on the TUC LGBT+ Workers Committee.

6.6           The format of the TUC LGBT+ conference will be discussed at the next TUC Committee meeting. [CM3] will provide update to LGBT+MSC about the conference format.

7              LGBT+ Members Conference

7.1           LGBT+ Members Conference minutes were noted. They will be approved at the LGBT+ Members Conference 2022.

7.2           The motion on trans rights and gender critical statements was passed at LGBT+ Members Conference. As an advisory motion, it will go to Equality Committee for endorsement and then passed to NEC.

7.3           It was NOTED that [VC] and [Chair] will convey at the Equality Committee meeting of 11 February, how LGBT+MSC would like to move this motion forward.

8              Congress 2022

8.1 It was NOTED that two members from LGBT+MSC can now attend Congress as delegates as opposed to observers.

9              Standing Items

i. Prides

9.1           It was NOTED that there will be a UCU stall at Birmingham Pride 2022.

9.2           It was AGREED to look to participate in the usual Pride events, London and Manchester.

ii.   International

9.3           Students are taken on international field trip for some courses. It was pointed out that there are organisations which provide advice on undertaking equality impact assessment for LGBT+ staff and students for such trips, as well as selecting safe places for LGBT+ staff and students. 

iii. UK

9.4           LGBT+ refugees still face a hostile environment when claiming asylum or refugee status. The Nationality and Borders Bill will disproportionately affect LGBT+ people.

9.5           [ESO] will update information about the Nationality and Borders Bill and the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Court Bill in the UK section for the next meeting.

9.6           It was AGREED that [CM7] will draft a statement around Nationality and Borders Bill. [VC] will put forward the draft statement to go to the NEC at the next Equality Committee.

9.7           The statement was as follows:

The UCU LGBT+ Members’ Standing Committee opposes the Nationality and Borders Bill and the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Court Bill. These reactionary bills are part of a continued government strategy to curtail the rights of citizens and non-citizens. We note the violent impact that these bills will have on the LGBTQIA+ community, in particular our disabled, migrant, and racialised comrades. We extend our solidarity and propose to work with other Equalities members’ standing committees to oppose these bills.

iv.  Monitoring

v.   Chartermarks

vi.  Bi-visibility

10              Motions Update

10.1        The paper on motions pre 2021 and motions 2021 were NOTED.

10.2        Resolution 55 is about challenging the assignment of sex at birth as this happens in binary gender. Previously UCU has tried to get other unions to campaign around this issue which was not fruitful. In Scotland the 2022 census will include a question about non-binary sex.

10.3        It was AGREED that sex assignment at birth would be an agenda item at the meeting of 1 April 2022. It was AGREED that [ESO] will work with [CM3 to look to put on a webinar on sex assignment at birth before 1 April 2022. It was NOTED that [ESO] will circulate information about sex assignment at birth to LGBT+MSC.

11              Congress 2022

11.1        There was a suggestion to put forward a motion on developing policies around deadnaming and misgendering for branches. There was a suggestion of drafting a model policy around deadnaming and GDPR, which can be uploaded on the website for use by equality reps in branches.

11.2        It was pointed out that being on a precarious contract would make it more difficult to challenge institutions, for being deadnamed.

11.3        There was a suggestion to put forward a motion on criticising the government policy around teaching excellence framework student survey. If a certain percentage of students do not get jobs within the discipline studied, then the Office of Students will move to withhold funding for that degree programme. This will have an impact by shutting down a range of degree courses which examine LGBT+ issues, in favour of a degree course which delivers a job at the end of the course. Only funding utilitarian degree courses is dangerous for embedding equality and inclusivity.

11.4        It was AGREED that [ESO] will draft the initial motions on:

·       developing policies around deadnaming and misgendering for branches

·       around how degree courses are taught and funded.

11.5        The drafts would be circulated to [CM1],[CM2],[CM3],[CM4], [VC], [CM6] and [CM8]. This working group would meet on Friday 18 February to discuss the motions. It was NOTED that the finalised draft motions would be circulated to LGBT+MSC for feedback with a deadline date.

11.6        It was NOTED that the deadline for motions is noon, 18 March.

11.7        There was a suggestion of reserving a number of seats for black and trans members on LGBT+MSC, to ensure that the most marginalised members are represented. This would require a change of standing orders which cover all equality standing committees.

11.8        It was AGREED that [VC] and [Chair] would raise broader representation on committees at the next Equality Committee, in order to advance intersectionality throughout UCU. It was AGREED that [VC], [Chair] and [Equality Officer] will meet to discuss this issue prior to the Equality Committee.

11.9        It was suggested to get data from the membership database and write to black LGBT+, trans and non-binary members encouraging them to join LGBT+MSC, once the nominations process is open before the 2022 LGBT+ Members Conference. It is important to write to encourage these members in order to encourage more diversity and participation.

11.10     In some unions the equality strands’ seats are committed to playing a much bigger role in NEC decisions than within UCU’s structure. There was a resistance in the democracy commission to increase the seats for the equality strands in HEC, FEC and NEC.

11.11     Ways of improving intersectionality and intersectional activism would be a good initiative to come from the Equality Committee.

11.12     The opening for a Black member seat on the TUC LGBT+ committee was discussed. It was suggested that whilst UCU can encourage the TUC LGBT+ committee to consider getting smaller unions involved UCU could also put forward a nomination if a member wished to stand. It was NOTED that [CM3] will find out the deadline date for the nomination. [CM3] will provide feedback to LGBT+MSC after the TUC LGBT+ meeting of 21 April 2022.

12              Trans and Non-Binary Solidarity 

12.1       [VC] introduced [General Secretary] and [redacted].

12.2        [General Secretary] outlined that the reason for attending the meeting was to get feedback from LGBT+MSC around UCU’s work on the position of trans inclusion and education beyond UCU’s membership. The work will involve campaigning, organising and education of liberation work within UCU.

12.3        In late 2021 the Sussex branch had a particularly difficult period because the branch committee supported trans inclusion in an issue around equality and academic freedom.

12.4        The government has been involved in a number of culture wars against universities around freedom of speech and conflating that with what academic freedom could and should mean. Academic freedom has been used as a cover to allow space for discriminatory conversation to open up and become legitimate. National UCU supported the Sussex branch.

12.5        UCU needs to ensure that branches are supported and have something prepared for them to support trans inclusion whilst dealing with culture wars and academic freedom. The aim is to develop campaigning material and educational videos which can be aimed at the general public, accompanied with a motion which every branch can pass to align with the democratic process of UCU. 

12.6        Work also needs to be continued around educating people to show that academic freedom is not at odds with UCU’s inclusion and liberation work.

12.7       [General Secretary] and [Head of Equality] met with the Sussex branch late last year and asked them what mechanisms could have been in place which would have benefitted them. This situation is likely to arise again and therefore it is important to have mechanisms in place to ensure that the situation which Sussex branch went through is not repeated.

12.8        The organising work is important to ensure that branches understand UCU’s national position.  

12.9        [General Secretary] also suggested putting on an event which showcases the contributions of LGBT+ UCU members particularly the trans and non-binary members.

12.10     UCU already has a strong trans inclusion policy. There are various strands to this work including campaigning, educational side, organising and how to better articulate why there are severe limitations to how the legal framework works. UCU needs to raise the general awareness that as part of academic freedom some things which are being said are so objectionable. The aim is to have a suite of activities and meet people where they are to get them on board in this journey.

12.11     Comments from LGBT+MSC

12.12     Some branches have a split of transphobic and non-transphobic members and therefore provision of resources for branches in terms of support, guidance or training would be beneficial when these sorts of attacks take place.

12.13     In local branches many LGBT+ members do not feel supported, even though national UCU is supportive of LGBT+ members.  

12.14     Besides being more assertive in challenging transphobic attitudes, UCU also needs to develop a campaign that brings LGBT+ community together. 

12.15     Supporting branches in combatting transphobia is important through education but there are a small core of people who are so entrenched in their views and UCU needs to address this issue, as they put forward extremely exclusionary ideology. It is important to look at ways of tackling these transphobes as they put forward hostile views which make campuses very unsafe places for trans people.

12.16     The campaign to disaffiliate from Stonewall, has led many institutions to create their own bespoke internal review LGBT+ strategy groups which can have exclusionary policies.  

12.17     UCU can look at its own internal processes such as Rule 13, whereby certain members have tried to push through exclusionary processes.

12.18     Management in institutions can use academic freedom and transphobia to erode solidarity and destabilise branches, as well as erode solidarity between staff and students.

12.19     It was NOTED that [General Secretary] and [Head of Equality] will put together an action plan from the suggestions put forward by LGBT+MSC into the different strands of educating, organising, campaigning and political work. There is a serious and urgent need to provide support for branches but also tackle the wider culture war being waged by the present government as well as the exclusionary entrenched ideology of a small core of transphobes in institutions and unions.

12.20     It was AGREED that [ESO] will put this as an agenda item for the next LGBT+MSC meeting.

13              Date and time of next meeting