UCU condemns University’s legal firm for ‘undermining freedom of speech’

The Warwick branch of the University and College Union (UCU) has condemned Warwick University’s solicitor firm, SGH Martineau, for a blog post that allegedly threatens academic freedom and freedom of speech.

The blog post was written by David Browne, senior associate of SGH Martineau, and was published in the legal firm’s education blog.

The original post likened the biting incident of football player Luis Suarez to the behaviour of academics who “have the potential to damage their employer’s brand. This could be through outspoken opinion or general insubordination.”

It stated that “in consistently accepting unacceptable behaviour, institutions may be setting dangerous precedents to other employees that such conduct will be accommodated.”

Universities and colleges may, equally, encounter high performing employees who, although academically brilliant, have the potential to damage their employer’s brand. This could be through outspoken opinions or general insubordination
 – David Browne, senior associate at SGH Martineau

After it received criticism on Twitter, the blog post was updated to clarify that it sought to address the “unlawful”, rather than the “lawful”, exercise of academic freedom.

Academic freedom

Dennis Leech, president of Warwick UCU, commented that in reading the original blog post, “the point Browne was making was that academics should be disciplined and have their freedom curtailed for the sake of their employer’s brand image.”

He added: “Of course we agree with them. However the change to the wording does not answer the point.

“Unlawful acts whatever they are cannot be defended and should always be a matter for disciplinary action. The university has procedures for dealing with them. But damaging the university’s brand by being outspoken and possibly annoying the government is not [an unlawful act]”.

He insisted that “academics in universities are supposed to be outspoken and should not be subordinate… Research is about challenging orthodoxy and convention”.

Warwick UCU unanimously passed a motion last Thursday 10 July in an Emergency Branch meeting stating that Mr Browne’s blog post was “openly casting doubt on the ability of academics to defend their rights to academic freedom as set out in the Education Act 1988 and the Statutes and Ordinances of the University.”

However, Jonathon Preston, marketing and business development director at SGH Martineau, clarified this by saying, “we can say that lawful strike action does not amount to a failure to follow a reasonable instruction and is not an unlawful exercise of academic freedom”.

Thomas Docherty’s suspension

The UCU also expressed concern that the blog was written the week before suspended Literature professor Thomas Docherty was due to face an internal disciplinary hearing.

Click here to see an update on the charge brought against professor Docherty

Mr Leech commented: “It seemed to us that this looked like a policy. What Brown had said fitted perfectly with the prosecution of Professor Docherty who is a very highly esteemed professor and one of Warwick’s stars… The charges against him all fit into what Browne said, under the rubric of ‘outspoken opinion and general insubordination’.

“…And there is a broader concern for our members in that Browne was advocating disciplinary action not only against ‘stars’ but all academic staff who are outspoken and damage the ‘brand'”.

The University denied that Professor Docherty’s suspension was related to his political views.

Mr Preston also denied that the blog post was consciously related to Professor Docherty’s suspension: “The blog was not written with any events at Warwick or any specific university in mind but reflects issues that have from time to time arisen in our work with universities generally, and indeed in the sector generally. For context, we act for around 100 universities and colleges.

“The blog was a comment on some generic legal issues that occasionally arise, as all our blogs are. If anything the blog was written with the World Cup in mind!”

University response

When asked what the University’s stance was towards Mr Browne’s views, Peter Dunn, spokesperson for the University, stressed that the view expressed in the blog post was that, “lawful exercise of academic freedom does not amount to misconduct”.

In response to an initial draft motion which called for the University to sever ties with SGH Martineau, the University insisted that, “Martineau’s have been, and continue to be, our choice for external legal support and advice for over 15 years because of their excellent standards and deep knowledge of the sector”.

The final UCU motion demanded University vice-chancellor Nigel Thrift to make a statement re-iterating his commitment to the principles of academic freedom and to explicitly dissociate the University from the position expressed in the legal firm’s blog.

Professor Thrift responded with the statement: “No-one should doubt this institution’s and my personal commitment to academic freedom. Universities are the environment in which colleagues can disagree and it is vitally important that they are able to do so. This is not only enshrined in our statutes but also in the values that have been articulated in all iterations of the University Strategy.”