Jo Grady’s UCU election win challenged over ‘unfair advantage’

Jo Grady’s victory in the last University and College Union (UCU) general secretary election is being officially challenged by her rivals, who claim she broke the union’s campaign rules.

Vicky Blake and Ewan McGaughey, who were also candidates in the 2024 poll, have applied to the union watchdog, the Certification Officer, over claims that the incumbent Grady had an “unfair” advantage owing to her use of union resources during the campaign.

Grady won the vote by a narrow margin of 182 votes over McGaughey, securing a second five-year term as general secretary until 2029, on a turnout of only 15 per cent.

The defeated candidates claim the election breached union rules and should be rerun. They are seeking an order that would see Grady forced to vacate her office if breaches are found and be replaced with an interim.

If the Certification Officer decides that the union has breached its rules or legal requirements, he will make a declaration and has the discretion to make an enforcement order or issue a financial penalty. The matter is due to be heard on 10 February.

UCU has denied all the allegations, saying they are “totally unfounded and we will be robustly contesting them at the certification hearing”. 

Blake and McGaughey’s case centres on Grady’s alleged use of UCU mailing lists and resources that were not available to the candidates who were not already in office.

The union’s campaign rules state that union email lists “cannot be used for campaigning by [National Executive Committee] candidates”, noting they are a “resource of the union”. Additionally, “candidates are not permitted the use of UCU funds or resources for the purposes of campaigning”, and candidates must “not approach UCU staff in relation to campaigning in NEC elections”.

Candidates were permitted to send four emails each to members via the mailing lists but Blake and McGaughey claim that Grady sent “far beyond” this, sending around 13 additional emails to members that they say benefited her campaign.

They further claim that she used union property, a union contractor and union software to produce and host campaign videos.

They will present screenshots from a WhatsApp chat, which included members of the senior management team, which are alleged to show Grady saying, “from now on, every single decision we make/thing we do has to be seen through the lens…re-elect GS [general secretary]”.

It is also claimed that she told members of the chat that “we will destroy” people in the union who opposed her.

Blake and McGaughey argue that the case raises questions about issues of governance and democratic functions at UCU, which have wider ramifications for trust in the union and its negotiating power. 

Blake, the contextual outreach lead officer at the University of Leeds, said: “We wouldn’t be in this position of even needing to bring this case if the election had been conducted fairly, and everyone who was a candidate conducted themselves fairly.

“It’s about respecting the union, and it’s about respecting our members. Our members – whose subs, after all, pay for everything that this union does – deserve to know that all of the procedures are being done properly, and that elections are being run properly,” she told Times Higher Education.

McGaughey, a professor of law at King’s College London, added that the union’s structures needed to function internally or else “how on earth is it going to function properly when you need to collectively bargain with management?”

A UCU spokesperson said: “The fact that complainants have gone to the press – before any hearing has taken place – shows they are more interested in smearing the union and its elected general secretary than accepting that they were both rejected by the majority of members in a democratic election.”