UNEASE@UCL

A&H is reviewing consultation feedback, but there’s little confidence there’ll be meaningful change, and the proposal is likely to degrade existing student wellbeing support. The EASE implementation appears driven by senior leaders’ role-building/power-building, not the staff delivering the services or the academics and students who rely on them. The process has been cack-handed so far….

My over-riding sense is that UCL no longer cares about its staff. The consultation process was a sham and many of our questions went unanswered or we were given false information. For example we were told that if we took redundancy we were unable to return to work at UCL for two years. After I…

The Faculty of Life Sciences is supposed to be towards the end of their EASE implementation period. As part of this process, the support for PGRs has been upended despite assurances of an extension to the implementation period to ensure that there would be minimal disruption. People with expertise have been lost and positions remain…

I have been asked to write a bit about my experience of the EASE process, which our faculty has been through recently. It’s difficult to know where to start but my main experience has been one of dehumanization, as this is how the whole process is conceptualized, carried out and that also seems to be…

This whole process has led to high levels of anxiety for many of the team over a long period. Communication has been either non-existent or very limited. This has left us to fill in the gaps, worrying about worst-case scenarios, and far from ready to engage with any consultation process. Requests for any information are…

EASE lacked care, professionalism, and transparency from the start. Repeated errors in documentation made it clear departmental staff did not matter. Role allocation was opaque and stressful: we were required to ‘apply’ for jobs and indicate our preferences, but some received their first or second choice roles while others did not, with no feedback or…