Following the Westminster Hall debate on a statutory duty of care for universities on 13 January 2026, Bournemouth University UCU wrote to Tom Hayes MP, Labour MP for Bournemouth East, to reflect local concerns and to place the national discussion in its current institutional context.

We were grateful for Tom Hayes’ contribution to the debate, in which he acknowledged the commitment of Bournemouth University staff to student wellbeing and emphasised that any statutory duty of care must be clear, consistent, and properly funded if it is to be meaningful rather than symbolic. We also welcomed the intervention by Mary Foy MP, who explicitly referenced University and College Union’s national position: that extending universities’ legal responsibilities without addressing workload, staffing, and resourcing risks placing unsustainable pressure on staff.

The local context at Bournemouth University

While the parliamentary debate rightly focused on the principle of a statutory duty of care, the local reality at Bournemouth University makes these questions especially urgent.

Despite references in the debate to the University’s financial gap of £15–20 million having “more or less closed”, BU formally entered a 45-day collective redundancy consultation on 13 January 2026. On that date, recognised trade unions were notified under paragraph 118 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (TULRCA), signalling the commencement of statutory consultation on potential redundancies among professional services staff.

This moment of organisational insecurity sits alongside already very high workloads for both academic and professional staff. Across the institution, staff are providing extensive pastoral, safeguarding, and crisis support to students—often beyond what is formally recognised, resourced, or accounted for in workload models.

Why staff wellbeing matters for student care

Our core position is straightforward: students can only be supported in their holistic health, safety, and learning when the staff who teach, support, and care for them are themselves supported by their employer.

A statutory duty of care cannot be delivered in an environment of chronic understaffing, excessive workload, and job insecurity. The relational, preventative, and humane support that students need depends on staff having the time, capacity, and organisational backing to do this work well and sustainably.

There is a real risk that reductions in staffing and further intensification of work will undermine precisely the kind of duty of care that Parliament is seeking to strengthen.

UCU’s position

UCU locally and nationally is clear: safeguarding students and safeguarding staff are inseparable.

If a statutory duty of care is to be credible, it must be accompanied by:

• adequate and ring-fenced funding,
• realistic and sustainable workloads,
• secure employment and sufficient staffing,
• and a parallel duty on institutions and government to protect staff wellbeing.

Without this, a duty of care risks becoming another unfunded mandate carried quietly by exhausted staff rather than a genuine improvement in student support.

Ongoing engagement

We welcome Tom Hayes MP’s response to our correspondence and his continued advocacy for properly funded student support. We will continue to engage with local MPs and national UCU as Bournemouth University moves through this consultation period.

The message remains consistent: student wellbeing cannot be separated from staff wellbeing. Any serious conversation about duty of care must start there.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

In solidarity,
BU UCU