News has reached CAF of several violations of free speech regulations at University College London. These range from job adverts that call for “commitment” to EDI, a trans guidance policy that describes “dead naming” as “unacceptable and probably unlawful”, and mandatory training that asks participants to make a “sustainability pledge”.
One senior member of the University, speaking on condition of anonymity, described being on “a hiring committee in July that required applicants to make a commitment to diversity”. CAF has previously exposed such requirements, which are highly likely to be illegal, at other institutions. They appear in different forms: sometime as part of an interview; sometimes as a piece of evidence to be submitted alongside CVs and published works. At UCL, however, commitment to the right ideas is simply listed as a criterion for academic positions.
For example, one job advert from the School of European Languages, Culture and Society includes a section for “Personal Qualities”, naming “Commitment to UCL’s policy of equal opportunity” as one of three “essential” criteria. This is not merely a requirement that applicants will abide by anti-discrimination laws. The official “Equal Opportunity Policy Statement” explicitly states that the institution “commits to promoting equality, diversity, and inclusion” in everything from the “assessment of students” to the “promotion of staff”.
This is far from the only example of UCL taking an official stance on contested issues and concepts. In a document titled “Guidance for manager: supporting lesbian, gay, bisexual staff at work” there is a fact box explaining that sex is “the biological characteristics that signify you [sic] sex i.e. male or female”, while gender is “your own understanding of your gendered identity e.g. masculine or feminine”. These controversial definitions are presented to staff as objective and inarguable matters of fact.
Indeed, there is little room for disagreement with the official stance here, as the same guide lists “deliberately ignoring someone’s preferred pronouns or using their former name” as an instance of “transphobia”. This is echoed in the corresponding guide for “Supporting trans staff in the workplace”. Here it is reiterated that “using ‘he’ to refer to a trans woman”, “dead naming”, and “objecting when a trans employee uses the toilet facilities of their affirmed gender” could “be examples of unacceptable behaviour” and are “probably unlawful”.
The guide instructs managers to “make [these restrictions] clear to staff and students and ensure they know they may face a discrimination complaint against them if they ignore this direction”. But chats with the higher-ups should include more than stern warnings, as the guide also recommends “providing opportunities during introductions at meetings to share pronoun use to demonstrate inclusion”.
All of this is preparing managers for “being an LGBTQ+ Ally”, which also requires one to “challenge assumptions” and “speak up”. For the latter, it is explained that “jokes about someone’s sexual orientation and/or gender can be harmful”, which is why it is important “as an ally” to “gently but firmly let [others] know that it is not ok”. However, this must be done carefully, as “it might be more appropriate to give the floor to an LGBTQ+ person to allow them to speak for themselves”. Unfortunately, the guidance does not explain how to distinguish between the times when you must reprimand people for their jokes and the times when you must allow others to do so in your stead.
Once employees have been screened for commitment to EDI and taught how to be effective allies, they can finally learn “how to be a sustainable colleague”. This is part of a recent training called “Change possible: sustainable UCL”, which was mandatory for at least some of the participants. In one section of the training, academics were presented with a video, informing them that “as researchers, we all have a role and a responsibility to address the climate and ecological crisis”.
From there the training went on not only to treat world-class academics as five-year-olds but also to encourage them to redesign their teaching and research around the sustainability agenda. In one section, participants are presented with a “Knowledge check”, which includes the question: “Can you tell us which actions will help reduce energy at UCL?”.
There are five options, ranging from “Use optimal energy savings on your computer” to “Use portable heaters when you are cold”. If anyone should be daft (or defiant) enough to choose the latter, they will receive the reprimanding feedback that such instruments “not only use a lot of energy, but also interfere with the temperature sensors controlling the heating for everyone else – leaving your colleagues cold”.
The rest of the training encourages participants to “embed sustainability into your teaching” and to “shape the sustainability debate through your research”. It is worth noting that some of the academics who received this training specialise in European languages and medieval literature. They must have been left rather confused as to their exact “role and responsibility” in addressing the ongoing “ecological crisis”. Nevertheless, at the end of the session, everyone was asked to make a “sustainability pledge”.
While it does not seem that anyone is forced to take the pledge, the mere fact that staff are encouraged to do so is seriously inappropriate and an obvious violation of institutional neutrality. But as these examples demonstrate, UCL is not too fussed about maintaining a neutral stance on anything, even contested subjects like sex and gender.
It can be hard to judge exactly which of these policies break the law and which only come close to breaking it. Still, the fact that they remain in force and do not even appear to be under legal review suggests that UCL is either unaware of potential breaches or does not care about them. Universities must be held to account for their violations of free speech protections. If not, there is little point in having such protections in the first place.
Click the button below to join our mailing list and get more CAF investigations and updates straight to your inbox.