Unveiling the Controversy: Principal Audrey Cumberford's Impact on Scotland's Colleges
In the world of further education the role of a college principal is pivotal in shaping the future of institutions and the lives of those within them, and the communities they serve. One such figure, our Principal, Audrey Cumberford now finds herself at the center of a storm of controversy. As the co-author of the Scottish Government-commissioned Cumberford/Little Report, Chair of the Scotland’s Colleges Principals Group, and a key player in decisions affecting jobs and course provisions, her actions have sparked outrage and concern among staff and students alike.
A Missed Opportunity for Change
Back in December 2022, a call went out to Principal Cumberford urging her to join forces with colleagues from the EIS, Unison and our dedicated students in lobbying the government for increased funding for colleges. Unfortunately her response was a firm refusal, leaving many puzzled as to why.
The Shocking Revelation
The answer came to light in January 2023 when it was revealed that Principal Cumberford had declined the invitation to join a joint lobby because she had in fact co-signed a request for additional Scottish Government funding. However, this request was not aimed at protesting impending cuts; instead it was intended to facilitate redundancy, sending shockwaves throughout the education community.*
*Source: Colleges Scotland 2023/24
The Mystery Meeting
In the same month, 189 lecturers received an abrupt summons to attend a meeting at their respective campuses, with only two days notice. This meeting created confusion and anxiety, as no agenda or title was provided in the email. Attendees had no idea who, how many, or why they had been invited.
Facing the Unexpected
The panel conducting the meeting was composed of a recently promoted Assistant Principal, two management levels below the Principal, an HR Manager, and two HR Associates. The Assistant Principal read out a prepared statement, dropping the bombshell that these 189 lecturers were being targeted for Compulsory Redundancy. The process and timelines were outlined, but many questions remained unanswered.
A Leadership Void
Perhaps most striking was the absence of the Senior Management Team, including the Principal, Vice Principals, Chief Operating Officer, and Director of HR & Organisational Development. It was weeks later that Principal Cumberford finally met with EIS-FELA Branch Reps, defending her absence by claiming she was respecting the position and status of the Vice Principal of Curriculum, who had led the process. This decision raised questions about where Principal Cumberford's priorities lay, as she appeared to prioritize the Vice Principal over the concerns of the 189 targeted lecturers.
Shifting the Goalposts
During the redundancy consultation process, college management moved the goalposts, reneged on previous timeline guarantees, and shortened the time lecturers had to apply for voluntary severance (VS). They cited feedback from targeted members as the reason, but this feedback was only shared with Senior Management, leaving the EIS and staff in the dark.
Despite meeting their financial saving target through the VS scheme, they inexplicably increased their target and implemented a deeply flawed and largely subjective scoring matrix to select individuals for redundancy. This lack of transparency and fairness has left staff feeling vulnerable in the face of further looming cuts.
A Culture of Fear and Intimidation
The consequences of these actions have instilled fear and apprehension among colleagues. Many are now afraid to take sick leave, challenge unreasonable management requests, or address issues such as excessive class cover, over-recruitment, and increased workloads. These concerns were highlighted in a recent EIS Stress & Bullying survey.
The Human Toll
In June, over 40 lecturers accepted VS packages, but their decisions were fraught with distress and perceived coercion. One lecturer was redeployed into a support role with reduced terms and conditions and subjected to a probationary period, despite the availability of teaching hours. Another lecturer was dismissed on the grounds of compulsory redundancy, despite ample teaching hours being available.
Call for Accountability and Transparency
In the nine months since these events began unfolding, Principal Cumberford and the Chair of the Board have consistently refused requests for an avoidance of disputes meeting and have rejected individual and collective grievances raised by lecturers and the EIS-FELA Branch Committee. Moreover, recent weeks have seen management withdraw college policies from Joint Local Negotiation Meetings with EIS-FELA and UNISON representatives.
The controversy surrounding Principal Audrey Cumberford underscores the need for transparency, accountability, and a commitment to the well-being of college staff and students. It is imperative that the voices of those affected are heard, and the necessary steps are taken to address their concerns. In the end, it is the future of Scotland's colleges and the quality of education they provide that hangs in the balance.
Comments
Post a Comment