Lobby of Stirling University Court

The protestors will assemble from 1pm on the Cottrell lawn, outside the Court Building, Stirling University prior to the meeting which takes place at 2pm. Local and national officers of UCU, UNITE and UNISON will address the crowds before lobbying members of court as they enter the meeting.

Stirling University announced voluntary severance scheme in June and its intention to lose 140 members of staff, which is nearly 10% of the workforce. The outcome of the voluntary severance scheme will be announced at the Court meeting and although the university is likely to be close to its 140 target, there are fears that it will still press ahead with compulsory redundancies, despite predictions of a financial surplus this year.

Due to mismanagement the university has suffered cuts in funding yet it was reported in the Sunday Herald yesterday that: 'Since 2004, the salary of the principal of Stirling University has increased from £132,000 to £213,000, a near 60% increase. In the same period, the full package enjoyed by the same official has increased from about £151,000 to £243,000.'

Mary Senior, UCU Scottish official, said: 'While the court contemplates voluntary redundancies to create a financial surplus the same body has rewarded the Principal huge pay rises. A reward for failure on a par with bankers.

'We will be outside the court meeting on Monday 19 October making clear our objection to any further redundancies and calling on the meeting to scrap any compulsory job losses. Instead they should contemplate their complicity in Stirling's financial crises by awarding huge rises to senior staff.'

Elaine Smith MSP, who also supports the rally and has lodged a motion in the Scottish Parliament against redundancies, says: 'The university has failed in its duty to negotiate with the union in a meaningful manner to avoid redundancies and as a result, many lecturers now face unemployment. I urge the university to curb any further redundancies. The cut in jobs is by no way reflective of the reduction in funding and is unnecessarily ruthless.'