For instructions on how to receive subtext by email, see our About page
- subtext 193 – ‘stay home and read subtext’
- SHOWING YOU CARE
- THE (UNOFFICIAL) COURT REPORT
- SOME THOUGHTS ON TONY MADELEY
- EMAIL SIGNATURE NEWS
- WE’RE STILL THE RECORD HOLDERS
- SUBTEXT PRESENTS: A SOLUTION TO TOILET PAPER SHORTAGE
- LANCASTER UCU TEACH OUT – SELECTED REVIEWS
- WIDDEN’S REVIEW – CONCERT FOR REFUGEE CRISIS
- DEMISE OF THE PIE
- subtext 192 – ‘strike while the subtext is hot’
- A TALE OF TWO UNION MEETINGS
- CASUALISATION NEWS
- PREVIEW – LANCASTER EXCHANGE II
- STUDENT DEMOCRACY UPDATE
- subtext 192 – ‘strike while the subtext is hot’
- subtext 191 – ‘fresh from the fridge’, December 13, 2019
- subtext 190 – ‘get subtext done’, November 1, 2019
- subtext 189 – ‘ imaginative thinking subtext’, June 28, 2019
- subtext 188 – ‘eurobants subtext’, May 23, 2019
- subtext 187 – ‘yet another meaningful subtext’, April 2, 2019
- subtext 186 – ‘stumbling towards a no deal subtext’, March 1, 2019
- subtext 185 – ‘the same subtext, only louder’, February 1, 2019
- subtext 184 – ‘life’s an illusion love is a dream’, December 17, 2018
- subtext 183 – ‘(white man) in lancaster sugarhouse’, November 23, 2018
- subtext 182 – ‘better late than ever’, November 8, 2018
- subtext 181 – ‘mean as you start to go on’, October 11, 2018
- All past issues
- March 2020 (12)
- February 2020 (13)
- December 2019 (9)
- November 2019 (12)
- June 2019 (10)
- May 2019 (11)
- April 2019 (8)
- March 2019 (9)
- February 2019 (9)
- December 2018 (9)
- November 2018 (21)
- October 2018 (10)
- September 2018 (20)
- June 2018 (25)
- May 2018 (32)
- April 2018 (14)
- March 2018 (29)
- February 2018 (23)
- January 2018 (14)
- December 2017 (16)
- November 2017 (29)
- October 2017 (37)
- June 2017 (1)
Tag Archives: building work
Congratulations to the Department of Engineering, which on 12 February announced details of major investment by the University, including another new building, next to the previous new building, featuring a ‘3D lecture theatre’ (the third dimension makes all the difference, we hear) and several new labs:
Some might wonder whether a truly far-sighted organisation would have predicted the need for a large dedicated lecture theatre back in 2013, when the soon-to-be-old new Engineering Building was being constructed, but hindsight is 20:20.
One thing the new building will need is a name – it was confusing enough when there was the old Engineering Building (now known as the FST Building, despite our attempts to give it a more exciting name in subtext 130) and the new Engineering Building, but now there will be two new Engineering Buildings, one of them is going to need a suitably well-engineered title – we’ll pass on any suggestions we receive.
A moderately populated Great Hall played host to the final all-staff meeting on Tuesday 25 June, led by Vice-Chancellor Professor Mark E Smith, CBE, before his imminent departure to southerly climes. The majority of those present, apart from the conflagration of senior managers [is this the correct collective noun for senior managers? Readers are welcome to write in with alternative suggestions] that routinely accompanies the VC to such events, appeared to be Professional Services (PS) colleagues. Leaving aside the general reluctance of academic colleagues to turn up to such meetings, this may have been as much to do with it being exam board season as with concerns about the freeze, err, control on new recruitment, which affects only PS staff.
‘Let’s kick off’, said the VC, perhaps showing his enthusiasm for what may come to be regarded as one of the main legacies (or white elephants, perhaps) of his tenure, Lancaster’s very own football university. A little later, UA92 also got its own slide, and according to the VC everything is going swimmingly, with the first intake of students due to start in September and recruitment apparently very close to being on target. He was keen to stress, however, that UA92 had a very ‘different model’ for student recruitment, with multiple entry points for students, and that it definitely was not in any way comparable with the normal university recruitment cycle. It would of course be churlish to assume that this means that UA92 has in fact recruited very few students!
Before going sportsy though, the VC was keen to highlight the good news. Financially, the HE sector is in pretty good health, with Lancaster at the top of the distribution. The phrase ‘Expanding Excellence in England’, rather than applying to the VC’s feelings about his own emoluments, is the name of a Research England fund which will contribute £7.6m, alongside LU’s own £5.6m contribution, for the ‘Beyond Imagination’ project housed in LICA. There will be a new School of Architecture, with students starting their degrees from 2020. And there are a host of building initiatives on campus in progress or about to start, including the Health Innovation Campus, a £1m refurb of Edward Roberts Court, the LUMS Space Programme (he didn’t mention the multi-million pound stuff-up that delayed it in the first place), a £6m expansion of the Sports Centre, the Library Phase 3 (whether there will be any staff left to work there is another question he did not address), a 400 seat lecture theatre, an upgrade of our district heating system, and a refurb of Bailrigg House.
The VC claimed that these developments showed that the University was increasing its physical infrastructure at the same pace as increases in student numbers, and that the new lecture theatre provided physical proof that this was true. Staff who have had to teach after 6pm this year might wonder whether in fact this was true, or whether the new lecture theatre should in fact have been built a few years ago to prevent evening teaching in the first place. And staff who have been denied a regrade, or whose departments or units have had vacancies turned down might wonder if all this spending on making the campus look prettier could have been put to better use (more on this later).
The VC whizzed through a few other international developments – the new Leipzig venture will offer degrees in Business from later this year, and in Computer Science from 2020, and there will be a ‘Future Cities Research Institute’ jointly hosted by Lancaster with its long-standing partner in Malaysia, Sunway. And closer to home, he outlined the changes to the University’s senior leadership, most of which had already been shared via the news portal, with the addition that Professor Sharon Huttly’s Pro-VC role would expand to encompass responsibility for not only Education but also Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI). This was a change from the previous plan, which was to have Stephen Decent look after EDI as part of the ‘people’ part of the Academic Development brief (which includes planning and resourcing). While the VC was keen to stress that all of the senior leadership had EDI as part of their brief, this move ‘created more bandwidth at senior level to work on EDI issues’. It will certainly be a welcome move for staff and students who have been campaigning on related issues to have EDI explicitly named in one of the Pro-VC titles, and with the greatest respect for Professor Decent, the optics of having yet another white man in charge of this portfolio were not great.
We have known since May that Professor Mandy Chetwynd would be retiring, and no doubt many subtext readers will wish her well and appreciate her long service to the University. What is not quite clear, which also came up in one of the questions to the VC, is what impact laying down the role of Provost for Student Experience, Colleges and the Library would have on… Colleges and the Library. Colleges in particular appear to have been under attack for a considerable period, with SCRs being closed, bars moving to central control, accommodation blocks spread around campus due to building work, and various college staff roles being reduced or centralised. It may be the case that this move represents the final nail in their coffin – until they are resurrected as nothing more than a convenient label for where students live in their first year.
The last substantive points in the VC’s speech, apart from a few warm words about the forthcoming graduation ceremonies, a reassurance (supposedly) that the Augar review could have been a lot worse, and a hurrah for our league table positions, were to do with the gender pay gap and the professional services freeze – sorry, vacancy control management. On the gender pay gap, the VC reported that there was reporting, reports, and engagement – but there seems to have been little actual action in the 15 months since Lancaster’s terrible pay gap statistics were first published. And this is hardly surprising, given that the expenditure on staff who have EDI work as their lead responsibility at Lancaster is considerably less than at many other HE institutions. And for the few roles we have, the pay also seems to be below par. Various reports are due to be published over the coming months (no doubt choosing to publish these in the summer when fewer staff and students are around is entirely accidental), so we will see what they contain.
On vacancy control, the VC followed his usual MO when faced with difficult questions, and retreated to technical details and graphs of figures showing the University’s adjusted net operating cashflow, where it was projected to be, and where we needed it to be in order not to get in to difficulties in future. But there was ‘no need to panic, absolutely a need to adjust the tiller’, he said, which may lead readers to wonder what icebergs lie ahead. The University faces no clear financial difficulties, apparently, but needs to be financially disciplined. How long this situation will continue, he said, depends on financial discipline. If student recruitment is strong, the period should be shorter. He was at pains to point out that it was not only Professional Services staff who were affected. The capital plan had already been adjusted – and no vacancy control would mean more adjustment. The consequences would be for example, not being able to address the longer teaching day (he did not mention that not having a prettier campus or not having a bigger sports centre are options). And, don’tchaknow, we’re all in this together: even the VC’s own office has had a vacancy turned down.
As the VC finished his remarks and turned to the questions submitted anonymously via the iLancaster app (human two-way interaction in the room is no longer desirable, apparently), it became clear that he had not, in fact reassured the University community on various issues. Numerous questions, a few submitted before he started speaking, but many during the session, related to the vacancy control. Others addressed UA92, paternity leave provision, the rumours of a closure of Religious Studies, advice for the new VC, neoliberalism in education, and why so few academics were present.
The VC gave a few convincing answers, but overall tended to deflect and refer back to his previous comments. Some of his answers may have given colleagues pause for thought. For instance, the idea that the vacancy controls required ‘imaginative thinking’ on behalf of managers in terms of how to address their staffing needs. No doubt many managers will be left imagining how their staff will cover the same (or higher) workloads with fewer people to do the work. The VC appeared to hint that in future there would also be controls (though he did not use this word) on academic recruitment, but that it was important to maintain staff-student ratios. And to a question about why PS staff were being targeted when there were some academics who apparently had not published or taught in years, the VC suggested this needed to be addressed through performance management, and that the new PDR process would allow this… and thus the seeds of division sown by this process seem to be bearing fruit already. One welcome clarification the VC provided was that maternity/parental leave cover should emphatically not be affected by vacancy control. Whether this message gets through to the people who have already knocked back requests for such cover (see letters, in this issue), or the managers who don’t even bother to apply in the first place because of the continuous pressure to find savings, remains to be seen.
It hasn’t been a great year for disabled people who study and work at the University of Lancaster. We started the year, in issue 166, complaining about a disabled toilet in Bowland North being filled with dust due to a combination of building works and a window that wouldn’t close. This minor mishap was dwarfed, as the sheer scale of the inaccessibility our building works were creating became apparent. In issue 179, we highlighted that there had been no fewer than NINE accessibility route changes put out by disability services in the space of two months.
Still, at least staff and students were made aware of the route changes, which is less than could be said for visitors to campus. Anybody consulting the university web pages, and particularly Lancaster’s DisabledGo page, would’ve (at the time we published our report) found no indication whatsoever that our campus had become an assault course. Indeed, in subtext 179, we reported that a number of people had swung by for a visit, and were left infuriated by what awaited them.
Lenient readers may be able to forgive all of the above as a failure to anticipate just how serious the disruption would be, but can there be any excuse for cutting funding to disabled students? This year our cash strapped top-table took the difficult decision to cut its financial contribution to SpLD assessments for students to 50%.
On the bright side, maybe the massive savings made from drastically impacting the life-chances of poorer students will be wisely invested into the Gary Neville University, who told us over the phone that they ‘aim to be’ an inclusive university.
We aren’t aware of any reaction to any of the above, with the cuts to funding for disabled students implemented with barely a whimper of opposition from anybody, except for subtext. You can read all of our coverage of disability issues this year via the links below.
We aren’t so nimbyist as to complain about the eyesore that campus has become or so stupid as to think that building works can be completed without a bit of disruption, but we draw the line at people being unable to work. As reported in subtext 166, Bowland North spent the tail end of summer covered in polythene to be sandblasted, blocking out all natural light. With no warning as to what work was even being done on the building, some staff members rather innocently left their windows open, leading to numerous colleagues spluttering and choking in the dust filled corridors.
Meanwhile, a disabled toilet was carpeted in stone dust and written off for the day, because its window couldn’t close.
But never mind the staff – the university is all about the students, and about providing a top ten educational experience. In the nine-and-a-half-grand-feez climate, students deserve to have their sessions spruced up a bit. Spruced up they most assuredly have been, with the intense seismic episodes, deafening crashes, strange chemical smells, dust showers, and contractors popping in to check the ceilings haven’t caved in proving to be a welcome addition to the learning experience. Yes, Fylde is the place to be if you want your learning to be exciting, but students who find learning boring may have enjoyed their sessions in the Charles Carter building, where a large generator was drowning out everything anyone was saying. In many cases, students and lecturers abandoned their sessions entirely in search of somewhere else. If they fancied moving into Management School Lecture theatres 5-8, they were bitterly disappointed. Apart from some turf being removed, seemingly nothing was done to it for the entirety of Michaelmas term. Why it was completely closed for all of that time, as we reported in subtext 171, was anybody’s guess…
… Until subtext 177, when we revealed that everything stopped because the project turned out to cost more than originally quoted. So work will resume in January 2019. Great. Hopefully they’ll get it right on the second attempt, rather than on the third, which was the case for some paving stones on the south end of campus. Cancelling or suspending part of a vast building project for financial reasons causes us to question how well this project has been managed. Doing so to make sure campus is going to be at all navigable by the start of 18-19, as is the case with the cancellation of the ‘Wetlands Bridge’ project near the Charles Carter building, leaves us in no doubt that this has been a logistical cock-up from one end to the other. See our earlier article, DISABILITIES for more commentary on the implications that all of this has had for disabled students.
We at subtext will continue to keep a close eye on how well promises are being kept and deadlines are being stuck to. Until then, please enjoy our efforts to do so from the last year, below.
Campus is currently full of temporary screens erected to shield sensitive eyes from the building work going on behind them. They are mainly installed as an aesthetic measure – ‘this place looks like a building site!’ is rarely a compliment – but subtext wonders whether they might also serve as a crude but effective way to cover up a total lack of progress.
As a case study, consider the Management School redevelopment – specifically, the demolition and replacement of the building containing Lecture Theatres 5-8. A great deal of work has gone into screening all that goes on within from the outside world, including wooden barriers (many covered in ‘artist’s impressions’ of what will replace it) and DIY frosting on the windows looking out over the site. What has been happening since the building was closed off back in July?
Well, to subtext’s untrained eye, the contractors BAM have so far managed to: (a) remove some turf; and (b) er, that’s it. Take a look for yourself – the best views can be had by going to the first floor of the new Engineering Building, heading for the southern side, and peering over. Are we missing something? Or have we basically just closed off four perfectly usable lecture theatres for the whole of the past term for no reason? LUMS students must be thrilled.
If any readers spot any BAM staff carrying out any demolishing here, please let us know.