Sorry for the immense delay – here are some minutes from the Bureaucracy group’s session: my laptop died and I’m a poor minuter, so somewhat sparse.
Minutes
- Apologies Cara, Hamza, Laerke apologies – Lucy and Rufus will be late.
- Meeting on Tuesday => Paula, Jake, Dante, (Annapurna maybe? Gaby and Caroline to write something for an Honours perspective) => G.01 College Office 55 GSQ; 2-3.30 and pre-meet at 1.30 in DHT basement café.
- Bureaucracy group session
- (Discussion of Graeber piece)
- Limit of just speaking to SPS; speak to anti-casaulation campaign people, expand beyond social sciences to have far broader understanding => try not to skew and shape a particular narrative and be selective of certain positions. Aware of their positionality and not to present their own views, but represent the actual views and reflections of people they engage with. => perhaps can be biased and fully accept they’re engaging in a political project
- Logic of this project is that it’s a highly controversial and contemporary struggle; a live matter with active campaigning; delays, tensions, ambiguities in the current campaign so interesting to get active insight into this bureaucratic procedure.
- Potential fear of tutors etc not wanting to openly share their reflections towards their ‘bosses’ as a matter of monitoring and policing of staff.
- Casualisation contract applied to international staff and different treatment of international staff => also many of these procedures are copied and modeled on American style contracts and bureaucratic management. => these things are quite long-term historical process, international and involve far more people than we might imagine.
- Casualisation as a spectrum for different staff and methods of doing so; way of limiting, controlling and undermining career progression and autonomy; massive job insecurity as a result.
- Temporariness of job prevents them for being more invested in their careers (unionising, organising and struggling) => seniority seems to suggest more willingness to organise and antagonise and lower-status workers less able to engage in campaigns, strikes etc.
- Highly fragmented campaigns and struggles between groups, staff and students => no mass movement as people are disconnected problems, not linked together or seen as relevant. => challenge for solidarity.
- Some good bureaucracy if well thought-out and mapped onto real needs; ambiguous and poorly developed bureaucracy can weigh people down whereas minimal yet constraining can often be more liberating, helpful and generate responsibility.
- (Smaller group discussion on the resources given by the bureaucracy group)
- University’s attempt to identify best practice for line managers woefully inadequate; no praising or identification of good work whatsoever, real guidance.
- (Further whole group discussion on the materials and final reflections)
