So, like many others, I've just put 10 x #uculevy into the @ucu fighting fund. I don't object to doing that per se, and I hope others will do likewise: a fighting union needs a strong fighting fund. HE and FE branches are facing redundancies and they need our support. 1/

I think more should have been asked of higher paid members sooner, we need more progressive subs and we need more of our subs to go into the Fighting Fund. That is clear and fine 2/

I have no time for the argument that the situation we are in is the sole fault of NEC/HEC for calling sustained industrial action. It's more complicated than that. I don't think the action we took has been fruitless and I struggle to see how less action might have gained more 3/

Some talk as though there's a magic strategy bullet that will solve industrial disputes without pain to anyone. But they never never explain what it looks like, and I am very sceptical. 4/

Some people, perhaps the same people, also seem to think that national and local negotiators are basically slackers who are Doing It All Wrong and if only the Right People got in the room with management all would be fixed. I do not believe this to be true.) 5/

I think that some people, perhaps other people, who don't want us to take strike action don't really want to change anything, or very much, in our sector - and believe me, I think they are wrong. So I'm fine with taking serious strike action and paying for it 6/

I'm not, however, fine, with having encouraged people to strike when they were worried about money, assuring them that the fund had their backs, and then finding out that it didn't. A money raising drive properly communicated could have been a show of strength, not weakness. 7/

Now, when I encourage people to strike and tell them the fighting fund has their backs, will they believe me? Will I believe me? We need honesty on this from our leadership if we are to step up in future - and if we cannot step up and fight when we need to, what are we for? 8/

And I'm not fine with the continued obfuscation about why a flat levy was/is to be imposed. NEC were clearly told anything else was not possible. Members were not told that in the FAQ, which simply said NEC had decided not to impose a progressive rate. That is unfair. 9/

And is it impossible under rule,or technically impossible,or just a bit tricky?-the latest communication from HQ is not clear on that, but advice needs to be clear on this so NEC knows what they are doing.And there is no obvious reason why any of that needs to be confidential 10/

And all this time branch activists are organising and campaigning and negotiating - and doing our uber-busy day jobs, and with all the worries of everything There really is only so much you can ask people to do - @ucu need to do better than this. end/