The reopening of UK universities and the subsequent rise of Covid-19 outbreaks across its student population has produced one of the most polarising debates around student wellbeing and the cost of a fulfilling experience in higher education. In preparation for the start of the Autumn term, Sussex students were lured back to their accommodation with the promise of a routine that was supposed to closely resemble ‘normalcy’ in the form ‘blended learning’, despite guidelines from SAGE on the 21st September that urged “all university and college teaching to be online unless absolutely essential”. Therefore, the steady increase in coronavirus cases both on campus and off can be seen as no surprise, and a sinister example of a university failing to straddle the line between ensuring student safety whilst still providing a satisfactory university experience at the price of £9,250k alongside student rent fees. Furthermore, the direction sent by Adam Tickell via email to his precariously employed staff on the 25th March to “terminate temporary contracts as soon as possible” once again proves university management’s talent for jeopardising the security of not only its students, but also its staff and wider faculty at a time of national uncertainty. However, the messy state that our current Higher Education institutions find themselves in becomes more complex in light of the government’s refusal to bailout universities for their lost international student and research revenue. This could be argued as enabling university execs to plead financial scarcity as a reason for continuing to charge full fees (or Tickell’s feeble gesture towards “long-term sustainability of the organisation”) but once again it remains the staff and students that are screwed over.
Before looking at the current issues facing Sussex students who are isolating in resident halls on campus, it is important to consider the ethical implications of Westminster allowing the return of students to university in the first place. The Guardian reports that we have seen more than 27,000 cases of Covid at universities since we have been told it was safe to return to campus, with Sussex’s own figures increasing weekly to 75 cases of positive students now isolating in halls despite Adam Tickell’s vague mention ‘of there only being a handful’ of cases at the beginning of October. The reopening of campuses involves thousands of students moving across the country risking further infections, transitioning into cramped student accommodation whilst enlarging the population of small university towns that struggle to maintain social-distancing under this sudden influx of students. Whilst the conditions of socially distanced classes, study spaces and carefully managed social events can be quite safe, this requires long-term mass investment in resources and infrastructure. It is hard to imagine an institution like Sussex meeting these needs, especially considering how the university would rather lay off its own staff before docking the bonus of its Vice-Chancellor £300k a year. The fact that tuition fees and rent prices remain the same means that students who rely on work to cover their housing and living expenses may struggle due to restrictions on bars and restaurants making the availability of part-time jobs scarce, altogether raising questions surrounding the physical and financial implications of returning to university.
In terms of our own campus, it is a small relief to see the university finally commit to providing a weekly allowance for students isolating both on and off-campus, alongside bringing in a mobile testing unit to make tests more accessible. It will remain unknown as to whether this is a result of management conceding to pressure from campus unions, or an attempt at smoothing over blunders such as charging international students £25 for a Welcome Box that cost £8.25. Moreover, it seems as though almost nothing has been done to address matters concerning those students who are studying overseas due to Covid-19 restrictions, such as the clumsy scheduling of seminars meaning students have to be awake at 3 or 4 am. An anonymous source tells BRICK “I’m an international student studying in a different time zone. When the clocks went back I received no notice from the university and missed my class. This is a basic level of consideration that should’ve been had for those studying remotely, yet was not afforded. It is becoming increasingly difficult to believe they have our best interests in mind.”
There is also a long road ahead for those campaigning for the total support of students on campus. This is exemplified by the list of demands drafted by joint unions UCU and Unite alongside the Student’s Union, which stresses the need for rent reimbursement for students wishing to be freed from their accommodation contracts.
Sussex’s Sports, Societies and Events Officer Annie O’Connor gave an exclusive statement to BRICK, outlining the reasons for last week’s rally and open letter to the University Executive regarding the treatment of students on campus. She claims:
“The rally we held gave students a space to express their frustrations with their current housing situations. Many students feel tricked and lied to by the University who were encouraging students to move to campus for the best experience this year. We must remember that this is not the situation we were in last year where nobody could’ve seen this coming. The university had months to plan the reopening of campus and plenty of published scientific advice warning of the dangers of filling halls to capacity - which was conveniently ignored. It is because of choices made by senior management at this university that Covid cases on campus are rising everyday. Most students in halls are constantly in and out of quarantine with minimal support. Students, particularly those in Park Village, also spoke about maintenance issues they’re having that aren’t getting fixed. These include lack of central heating, problems with damp, and broken appliances. Additionally, a feeling that was shared by most students in attendance was that they don’t feel safe. Partly for fear of getting sick, partly because of the impacts their living situation is having on their mental health, and partly due to the fear of being evicted or excluded for breaking social distancing.
Students should not be paying thousands of pounds in tuition fees and even more thousands in rent to be sat in their rooms all day fearing sickness and eviction. This is absolutely unacceptable.
In our joint union statement sent to the University Executive, UCU and Unite joined the Students’ Union in demanding that the university allow students to cancel or defer their accommodation contracts without penalty. They agree this is important to demonstrate that the university is not prioritising financial concerns over the health of students and staff.”
If these demands fail to be met, then Sussex appears ready to take action alongside other UK universities such as Bristol and Manchester in the organisation of a rent strike. Indeed, the SU’s participation in an online training course organised by the National Union of Students echoes their Vice-President’s warning to MPs on the 6th October that students will not hesitate to take action if not offered “full rent reimbursement, free internet access, care packages with food, household products, wellbeing materials and general necessities.”
It goes without saying that the mental and emotional wellbeing of students should be paramount to those with a duty of care in such circumstances. Yet the pandemic serves to highlight some of the broader problems relating to the quality of Sussex and Brighton’s mental health services, such as being over-subscribed and with limited availability. An anonymous source informed us “I had to wait around 4 months for an assessment before the pandemic, not sure how long the wait is now. But when we went into lockdown the Brighton Wellbeing service discharged everyone who wasn’t a key worker. I was due to start CBT in April so I rang them and asked if I would be put back on the waiting list, or if I would be prioritised when they resume treating non key workers. But they said no, I was discharged and that was that! I had an hour-long phone call with someone else from Wellbeing soon after that where they asked me to rehash all my trauma, so I did, but they just told me to go private. I’m not going back to them, it’s the third time they discharged me without any treatment.”
Given these circumstances, it seems vital that the University be as accommodating as possible by creating a safe and reassuring environment on campus. Yet their draconian measures of equipping security guards with body-cams to hand out unlimited fines to those who break social distancing just acts as an additional stressor for those who are seeking help during this time. It is near impossible to prevent students from finding a way to socialise outside of the formal arrangements, especially first years who will want to make new friends in an unfamiliar environment. Moreover, the first lockdown was a hugely isolating and lonely experience for many, so naturally, the reopening of university-provided relief for those who found the separation from their friends for 6 months a tough experience. To then tell students they’re not able to meet up - and landing them with huge fines when they do - is not only out of touch with the nature of being a young adult, but also scapegoating students for seeking comfort. Yes, socialising will have hazardous effects in terms of spreading the virus, but perhaps our anger is more deserved towards the institution that coaxed them back to campus.
The incident that took place on campus on the night of Halloween, in which several police vans were called to disperse a mass gathering of partying students, can be seen as the messy consequence of allowing a bunch of 18-20 year olds to move back into uni accommodation. This isn’t to say that the actions of those involved weren’t selfish, or reckless (what else do we expect from kids at that age), but chaotic events such as those seen on Saturday were inevitable in inviting students back to university. It is also worth arguing that there is a link between the frustration, confusion and resignation felt by the wider general public at Boris’s announcement of a long overdue second lockdown on the 31st, and the proceeding parties that happened that night - students and adults alike. Of course compliance is less likely when we are at the receiving end of our government’s fuck-up. Furthermore, the fact that Boris won’t want students to return home as our second lockdown occurs - amongst other prospects of an extended lockdown over Christmas - could result in dire consequences for student mental health. This is not to condone non-compliance, but to stress that no one is winning from our university’s current situation. Not the students who came to university in the hope of a relatively ‘normal’ life, nor the students who wish everything was just moved online so we don’t have to endure any more of Sussex’s flailing juggling act between safety and business as usual.
Furthermore, the treatment of Sussex’s staff and wider faculty amid the pandemic once again exposes the university as becoming increasingly run like a business that prioritises profit-margins over job security. The clear devaluation of staff was evident in management’s pressure for members to come back to work and face the risk of the virus, rather than pressuring the government to support the education sector through the pandemic. What’s more, on the 1st October Adam Tickell issued his ‘View from the VC’, offering a cringe-worthy salute of ‘applause’ to the staff that returned to face-to-face teaching. However, his message heavily implied that the online/remote provided by staff was somehow inferior in content and effort to those in person, leaving the staff who could not return to campus for disability, medical or care reasons feeling undervalued. This was articulated in an open letter by an anonymous UCU branch member to the VC, who expressed their “dismay, frustration and hurt” for being made to feel as if online tutors are “in some way not embodying the community spirit of Sussex.”
The situation for staff deteriorates when considering the precarious position of those on temporary contracts, who despite having already been overworked and underpaid before the pandemic, are then on the 25th March contacted via email that their contracts be encouraged to end “as soon as possible.” When management clarified their position in a public statement claiming “the Covid-19 pandemic has accelerated the timescales for the University to seek savings, as laid out by the Financial Review Guidelines” they exposed themselves as using the pandemic to prey upon the vulnerability of those working hard to deliver education under already stressful circumstances, and without looking in their own pockets. This article was also written amidst news circulating of the planned mass redundancies of 70 percent of the university’s catering staff next month, under instruction from operator Chartwell’s Higher Education. BRICK and other publications are standing alongside campus unions in the fight to prevent these job losses through collective organising and petitions including this one, created by student Mia Lisa.
Many of the workers have been long-time members of staff at Sussex, who were faced with the challenge of returning to work at the height of the pandemic in order to earn a living wage, alongside participating in the demanding task of delivering food to isolating students. The fact that they are now facing redundancy in order to be replaced by temporary agency workers highlights the harsh consequences of outsourcing contracts, and further embodies Sussex’s participation in the growth of market economics at UK universities.
These developments make it easy to feel helpless and fatigued in the fact of the university’s evident lack of support for students and staff at the time of national crisis. Fortunately, it remains that our student body has refused to accept the current state of things and have demonstrated their inherent proficiency for direct action and collective organisation to represent the needs of the whole university community. This ranges from the setting up of campus-based networks in the form of mutual aid to provide food for isolating students, to the educating of Sussex Renters’ Union to students about their rights as tenants and pushing for better living conditions, links provided:
SU selling subsidised food parcels
Instagram for Sussex Renter’s Union
Sussex Covid-19 Community Solidarity Facebook Page
As long as senior management continues to claim that it had no other option than to reopen the university, it is up to Sussex students and our trade unions to fight against any injustice that hazards the health, safety and security of our students and staff. This boils down to ensuring that student wellbeing is maintained over profit, and that our staff are not treated as disposable. Whether this be in the form of an implemented pay ratio for lowest to highest paid staff, to giving students the option to opt out of accommodation contracts, a proper plan needs to be devised, freeing us from this limbo in which only Tickell and his management seem to benefit.