Wednesday 6th August 2025
Blog Page 549

Jazz Society launch record label

0

Oxford University Jazz Society have welcomed in the new year with the announcement of the launch of their new independent record label, JazzSoc Records.

Describing the project as an “offshoot of JazzSoc proper”, president Liam Gesoff sees the purpose of the label to be a celebration of the wealth of talent within the Oxford Jazz scene.

A completely student-driven initiative, the label’s aim is to promote the interests of the existing club’s constitution; stating that “the support, development, improvement and promotion of both the performance and appreciation of jazz music in the University of Oxford” are its core objectives. As an often overlooked genre in the wider student body, the label stands as a service to the thriving student jazz community, both in listenership and musicianship.

3rd January 2020 marks the label’s first official release: All In, a three-track EP of ‘groovy post-bop jazz’ from band SNARP.

The self-produced EP introduces the talents of students Huw Cheston, Josh Cottell, Joe Zacaroli, Tom O’Connor and Leonard Maassen, featuring Mikey Ahearn and Jonny Danciger, with artistic direction by Sophie Nathan-King. Gesoff told Cherwell that “the album really is a first-class exposition of the true potential that Oxford has to offer jazz music.”

As well as the promise of more “exciting and raw” musical releases throughout the year, the label is also affiliated with Tuesday’s live music nights at Mad Hatter. The line-up for Hilary term is confirmed and is due to be released through JazzSoc imminently.

To find out more about the label, its artists, and what they have in store for 2020, information can be found at jazzsocrecords.studio. All In, and all future releases will be available to purchase on the website and to stream on all major digital streaming platforms.

To get in touch with the label for further information or if you have an interest in getting involved, you can find them on Facebook at www.facebook.com/jazzsocrecords, or via email at [email protected].

Queering Sport

0

There are all of these sports that I never knew existed before I came to the UK. Apparently there’s a version of hockey that people play underwater, while holding their breath. Personally, I am a fan of oxygen, so I decided to give “Octopush” a pass.  But when I heard about the sport “netball,” I was excited to try it out.

It has a similar setup as basketball, which I had enjoyed when I was a kid. So I signed up to play in a casual weekend match with my college team. And I was hoping that, maybe, I would be good at it too, what with all my prior “hooping” experience.

As it turns out, my talent at netball is comparable to Sean Spicer’s at dancing. I found myself struggling to keep up with the ultra-fast pace of the game, and apologizing to my teammates for the various blunders that I made. And when crunch time came, I subbed myself out. The rest of my team wanted to win, and I didn’t want to stand in the way.

Elite sport (that is, high-performance youth sport, or sport played at the inter-university or professional level) is often criticized – for being too dangerous, too time-consuming, too costly, and causing too much stress.

I would like raise a new critique, one that I aim not at elite sport, but at “casual sport” – like the netball game I played in, which was commitment-free and open to anyone.  My thesis is this: Casual sport is, very often, played more competitively than would be prudentially optimal for participants (or would-be participants). This is a natural consequence of the way that sports are set up. In order to better promote everyone’s interests, we should make deliberate changes to the way that we play.

In many sports, a highly competitive, physically strenuous style of play emerges by default – even when no stakes are attached to the outcome of a match, and even when it is billed as ‘friendly’ and ‘open to all.’ Part of the reason for this is self-selection; those who sign up to play an intramural sport at university, for instance, are often people who played that sport on the ‘first team’ at school.

So not only are they highly skilled and physically fit, but they come with a competitive mindset – ingrained from years of coached, “all-out” play. And part of the reason is how games are structured – with two teams pitted against each other, and someone keeping score.

I think that the high intensity of casual sport can be a problem, for two reasons. First, for many of us, a more relaxed style of play is prudentially optimal; we’ll have more fun (and will be less likely to get injured, too).  Second, the less competitive a sport is, the more inclusive it is; those with less athleticism or experience can comfortably play – and not feel like their presence is a burden to the team.

If high-intensity is sport’s default setting, we need to take deliberate measures if we want to dial it down.

One proposal could be to have clubs where people would play a rotation of different sports, rather than choosing a specific one; this would overcome the self-selection problem, ensuring that a significant fraction of players would be inexperienced at each sport that was played.  So you wouldn’t need to be able to keep up with varsity-level athletes, in order to take part in a casual game.

Another solution would be to remove the competitive element from games entirely.  Next time you decide to play basketball with your friends, you could try just casually “shooting around.”

But suppose that you want to play a specific sport, and don’t want to remove the element of competition. Is high-intensity play an inevitability?  I don’t think it needs to be.

I suggest that we look to queer and social justice-oriented spaces – and their norms around inclusion and access – for the solution. In these spaces, there is a strong ethos of making them as accessible and welcoming as reasonably possible.

This event description of an upcoming queer club night – which specifies that the venue is wheelchair accessible, no strobe lights will be used, earplugs will be available, and to get in touch with further accessibility requests – is illustrative of the sort of deliberate efforts that are made, in these spaces, to make sure that everyone is included.

(More precisely, deliberate efforts are made to ensure that no one is unjustly excluded; those who violate zero-tolerance policies against discrimination and harassment are justly excluded, and some events are intended for only queer people, or another identity group, and their guests.)

And while this ethos is prevalent in almost every type of event in queer and social justice spaces – from parties, to film screenings, to academic talks – there is one activity it hasn’t fully permeated: sports.

Queer sports clubs do exist – and serve as very needed safe spaces from the homophobia, transphobia, and toxic masculinity that too often afflict other sports clubs.  But competitive play is still the norm – leaving out the less physically fit or able (and the able-bodied but bumbling athlete like me).

Perhaps this is by design. Under some conceptions of sport, it is not supposed to accommodate everyone. To the contrary, philosopher Michael Sandel has argued that sport is supposed to test and reward those with the greatest ‘natural gifts.’

Maybe this is a defensible view of elite sport (though I have argued elsewhere against it).  But for intramural netball, or post-work pickup basketball, or Philosophy Faculty football, I think that our guiding considerations should be: (1) Is this event as accessible as possible to those who are interested?, and (2) Are participants benefiting as much as possible from the experience?

In some cases, these considerations will still favour a highly competitive style of play.  For example, a group of friends might decide to play pick-up, and they all might have the preference for it to be intense.

But very often, I think that these considerations will weigh in the direction of making sport less competitive.

What would “less-competitive sport” look like in practice?  The best model that I have come across is Queer Kickabout East, a London-based football group.  In their description on Facebook, they actively discourage competitive play: “If you’re great at football, give others space to play too. Step back and try not to dominate.”; “We don’t take ourselves too seriously”; Minimal running”; Run as much as you feel”; “No apologising! No need to say sorry for missing a ball etc.”

I haven’t made it out yet to one of their weekly games at Victoria Park.  And now that the weather is getting cold, I think I am unlikely to summon up the motivation to anytime soon.  But next spring, I will be there. I may not be a netball star, but I hope to be a happy kickabout-er.

Girls to the Front: a brief history of Women in Rock

0

It is encouraging news that, according to a 2018 study by the guitar manufacturer Fender, 50% of new guitarists in the US and UK are female. This should not seem particularly surprising, as the 2010s have firmly signalled a shift away from the dude-rock days of old. Guitar virtuosos St Vincent and Anna Calvi have racked up signature guitar models and Mercury Prize nominations respectively, whilst the likes of Courtney Barnett, Stella Donnelly and Mitski are firmly in the upper echelons of critics’ best-of-decade lists. Supplementing theses successes are new publications such as She Shreds magazine, encouraging young women to follow in the footsteps of their female guitar heroes; sidestepping the forums of information which might have previously intimidated new players.

However, such developments have occurred whilst guitar-based music is losing the cultural dominance and relevance it once took for granted in the mainstream. As such, the popular music industry has been left to bank on safe male acts in a rapidly changing musical landscape. This is evident from merely glancing at the line-up for popular music festivals such as Reading & Leeds, which has hosted one female headlining act in 20 years despite having hosted Foo Fighters four times within the same time span. Calls for 50/50 line-ups have been in good faith, but feel tokenistic and do little to tackle the deep rooted problems within the music industry which deters female musicians; exploitative management, casual misogyny from gig-goers, and clueless record company marketers.

But why should we be paying attention to a genre as ageing and seemingly irrelevant as rock, regardless of the gender of the musicians performing it? The answer lies in punk, and art created by those on the fringes of the music industry. Following in the footsteps of the first wave punk musicians such as The Slits and The Raincoats who reconfigured guitar playing with their DIY ethos in the late 1970s, the ‘Riot Grrrl’ movement which sprung out of 1990s America revolutionised the space for female musicians. In addition to the music, out sprung an anti-patriarchal, pro-female empowerment manifesto, with one key line being, “because we want and need to encourage and be encouraged in the face of all our own insecurities, in the face of beer-gut-boy-rock that tells us we can’t play our instruments.” 

A grassroots, ‘zine’-based movement which sought to further feminist ideals through art has obvious blueprints for a contemporary environment. The traditional routes of music distribution is bypassed in the online arena, feminist activism is global and the political climate is ripe for engendering artistic rebellion. Just look to the likes of Russian protest group Pussy Riot if you remain unconvinced that punk is no longer relevant as a vehicle for change. Sister Rosetta Tharpe, a daughter of black cotton pickers in the rural deep South, did not invent the idea of a rock ‘n’ roll guitar in the mid 20th century so that we could listen to landfill indie tunes about lads having a night out dancing to Joy Division with their mates.

Grunge iconoclast-cum-Urban Outfitters t-shirt design Kurt Cobain once remarked that women were the future of rock ‘n’ roll, and as guitar mic settles into its role as an underground phenomena in the 2020s, one can hope that a genre led by those who had historically faced little support in the music industry will be able to recover its artistic vibrancy with a wider range of influences and experiences informing their work. After all, a reconfiguration of the perceptions of the genre away from post-Oasis testosterone driven dude-rock surely is a welcome relief for all of us.

‘Find Me’ Expands Romance and Falls Flat

0

Find Me is the October 2019 sequel to André Aciman’s 2007 novel Call Me By Your Name, which was popularised by the success of its 2017 movie adaptation. As a much anticipated follow up, Find Me is at times poignant, if not a slightly disappointing read for expectant fans.

The story of Elio and Oliver, central to Call Me By Your Name, takes a back seat for the majority of Find Me. The book is split into three major sections. The first is set ten years after the events of Call Me By Your Name, focusing on Elio’s dad, Samuel, who meets a much younger woman, Miranda, on a train. They fall in love almost immediately. The second section is five years on from this, when Elio meets an older man, Michel, with whom he too falls suddenly in love. It is only towards the end of the novel, a further five years later, that we check in with the married Oliver in America and watch his long-expected reunion with Elio from Aciman’s earlier book.

The first two sections parallel each other across decades through the similar cross-generational romances. Despite making readers feel perhaps a little apprehensive at first, Aciman does handle the age differences sensitively, and in a non-predatory fashion. The characters enjoy in-depth conversation, so you at least feel like they’re getting to know each other before they get it on.

But at times, the transgressive flirtations do feel slightly stomach-turning, especially with the novel’s focus on familial ties. Miranda confesses how as a teenager she yearned to have sex with her brother. Also at one point Elio’s older man, Michel, confesses to him that “you remind me of my son.”

It all makes for some interesting inter-generational philosophy about time and relationships, but it’s somehow not as coherent as Call Me By Your Name. The first book was ineffable and immersive, focusing mostly on one summer and a relationship between two people. Above all, it managed to realistically present how it feels to be a teenager in love. The sequel seems to lose that richness somewhere between all the narrative threads and switching perspectives.

There’s something profoundly unrealistic about how Aciman’s characters talk and behave. With the constant high-brow, philosophical dialogue plus the tendency of each character to speak in long, musing speeches, it’s all kind of repelling. These people suddenly seem like characters you wouldn’t really want to meet, let alone have a conversation with.

What is difficult with this book is that the prose is lovely. It is just nice to read for the most part, despite the nonsense. Every now and then, it strikes a palpable chord, especially if it’s detailing something sad or nostalgic. At one point Samuel provides one of these moments as he speaks with Miranda. He suggests “…the magic of someone new never lasts long enough. We only want those we can’t have. It’s those we lost or who never knew we existed who leave their mark. The others barely echo.” This is charming to read, albeit far from what anyone would actually spout to a stranger on a train.

So Find Me is a pleasant, romantic read. But it wasn’t as good as the first book, and it might just make you want to read something a little grittier once you’re done.

Review: Marriage Story

“Everything’s like everything in a relationship, don’t you find that?” This is the question Nicole (Scarlett Johansson) asks at the start of Marriage Story. She’s talking about the first pangs of love, so infectiously euphoric, so all-encompassing, that they don’t just make you fall for someone, but for everything about them all at once. Noah Baumbach’s latest film isn’t interested in the bright glow of new beginnings. Instead, it is here to show that there is just as much truth to the flip-side of this sentiment, at the other end of proceedings, through the slow collapse of a marriage and the pains of divorce. It is a love story – one about trying to hold onto what love is left as the hurt and anger of separation threatens to tear apart all it touches.

The central couple begin this journey with honourable intentions. Nicole is an actress, feeling subservient and stifled in her marriage and longing to make something of her own by getting back to her roots in LA, where she grew up and first encountered acting success. Charlie (Adam Driver), is a self-made, up and coming avant-garde theatre director desperate to keep their son, Henry, in New York with him, where his career finally seems to be taking off. Regarding their split, they say that they’re ‘doing it differently’: this is going to be as amicable a divorce as possible. But in matters of the heart, things are never quite that simple.

The film evidently owes much to Woody Allen, with its LA – New York dichotomy, focus on show business, and soon-to-be-over dysfunctional relationship. And there are some scenes of similarly astounding invention here, as good as anything in Allen. The serving of divorce papers becomes an intricate, whirlwind ballet of people frantically entering and leaving a kitchen as the critical moment looms ever larger. Here it isn’t Hitchcock’s bomb under the table at work, but Baumbach’s manila envelope of legal papers on the counter. It’s a masterfully constructed, dizzying balancing act between the sorrowful, the suspenseful and the comic (I challenge anyone to name, in cinematic history, a pecan pie that got a bigger laugh).

Baumbach manages to pull off the same trick in numerous legal scenes dotted throughout. Guiding the young couple through this torturous process are three divorce lawyers, brilliantly portrayed by Laura Dern, Ray Liotta and Alan Alda, each with their own take on what divorce is really all about. Liotta especially deserves a mention for his performance as a snarling attack-dog of a lawyer, determined to win no matter how vile and undignified his methods.

Nicole cuts the hair of her soon to be ex-husband Charlie in “Marriage Story” (Netflix)

But while it is clear that there is great fun to be had here, the film sets its sights on weightier ground. From the first shot of Johansson emerging from the blackness of a darkened stage, Baumbach is consistently, at critical points, happy to drop everything and let the camera push in and rest on his actors’  faces, sometimes for minutes on end. It’s a sign of a director who trusts his two leads completely, and he’s right to. The performances are extraordinary, featuring little glances revealing years of accumulated hurt (watch Nicole every time someone, even she, calls Charlie a genius), to full-throated cries of helplessness. These moments are all about the veins throbbing on their foreheads, the fearful determination in their unblinking eyes, the snot threatening to flood out of their nostrils. It’s unflinchingly visceral stuff. 

In a lesser film, some of these key climactic confrontations could be seen as, at best, a melodramatic indulgence, or, at worst, a threat to the film’s otherwise carefully woven realism. But Baumbach knows exactly what he’s doing. The close juxtaposition between the heart-wrenchingly emotional and the soothingly ordinary is what is at the heart of this film. Sometimes it is only the cutting of hair, or the tying of a shoelace, that can cut through the rage and hurt swirling all around. 

“It’s not as simple as not being in love anymore,” says Nicole, explaining how her marriage fell apart. This is a film that dares to show, and embrace, love at its ugliest and most desperate, and to suggest that it can grow even stronger as a result. It may just be the most honest, human film of the year.

*“Marriage Story” is currently streaming on Netflix

THE BEST FILMS OF THE DECADE

We, your Film Section Co-editors, have assembled a totally and completely objective top ten best films of the 2010s list. While we theoretically believe that movie-goers can, and should, form their own personal canons of great cinema, we are also comfortable with you using our humble list to feel better about your own refined tastes. Discuss!

We Need to Talk About Kevin (2011)

This adaptation of Lionel Shriver’s 2003 novel is an utterly disturbing portrait of the origins of evil, and if this term is even authentic. Tilda Swinton’s performance as a mother who resents her parental role is controlled in her coldness, ruling and constructing the psychological drama of the film. Ramsay’s adaptation taps into human vulnerability, as well as the capability of fear and intimacy to live side by side. –Isabella Colletta

Inside Llewyn Davis (2013)

I’m sure that we’d all like to thank Joel and Ethan Coen for assembling the league of extraordinary faces to cast this film: Oscar Isaac, John Goodman, Adam Driver, F. Murray Abraham… what formidable noses to bring to bare on 1960s New York! This sisyphean story of a folk singer who never quite makes it is a wonderfully ambiguous portrait of a struggling artist. The film’s strength is that it never fully clues us in as to whether or not our protagonist is properly good at what he’s doing. It’s clear that Llewyn is musically gifted, but the film isn’t about the triumph of talent– it’s about talent at the wrong time and talent of the wrong kind,  and the way those tensions weigh on a soul. –Danielle Rae Childs

Oscar Isaac in “Inside Llewyn Davis”

HER (2013)

Spike Jonze’s films have a knack for making cliched truths about love seem fresh and urgent. In HER, the love story between human and AI demonstrates how as much as it may seem like love narrows our gaze, the experience of being in love actually widens our capacity to feel affection. Thanks to some clever world-building by production designer K. K. Barret, HER’s speculative near future setting is utterly believable and grounds the film’s lofty emotional messaging: ”I’ve never loved anyone the way I love you.” //  “Me too. Now we know how.” Scarlett Johansson’s purely vocal portrayal of Samantha, the artificially intelligent operating system, is among the best performances of the decade and rightfully sparked much controversy around what types of acting deserve awards recognition. All hail the posthuman ScarJo.  –Danielle Rae Childs

The Big Short (2015)

The star studded financial drama of the lead up to the 2008 financial crisis demonstrates, with equal measures of chaos and absurdity, that the realm of banking is controlled by few, with even fewer eventually winning from the system. Adam McKay takes on the formidable task of making a complex economic downfall both coherent and entertaining, a task he fulfills admirably. Comic performances and cameos present the nonsensical workings of the financial elite, honing in on the ridiculous comedic value of hindsight. However, it is this very hindsight that provides the film with its tragic quality, and drives McKay’s directorial style and many performances from his actors with an inescapable cynicism. Both horrifying and mesmerising, this film takes a dive into the cesspool of the world of individuals who constructed a global crisis.  –Isabella Colletta

The ensemble cast of “The Big Short”

Manchester By the Sea (2016)

The banality of grief, the unrelenting process of mourning, is the driving force behind Kenneth Lonergan’s drama on loss. Casey Affleck gives a captivating performance as Lee, a Boston janitor exiled from his old mercantile home town, and draws us into the inescapable and pointless injustice of his personal tragedy. The death of Lee’s brother forces a return to a place haunted by grief and regret, placing a grief-stricken person in a position of stasis, with little to hope for in terms of closure. There is little relief from the sombre tone of this film, but it is rare grief is captured in its unrelenting persistence. –Isabella Colletta

Moonlight (2016)

Everyone’s heard how deeply moving and important Moonlight is, but it remains one of the most underseen Best Picture winners of all time. I urge you reader, make 2020 the year you finally give this coming-of-age story it’s due. Moonlight chronicles the life of an African- American boy as he grows up wrestling with his sexuality and enduring abuse. The power of this film is that the content unfolds so fluidly that the narrative feels intimately observed, rather than fabricated. And yet, given the architecture of the film’s three act plot and the vibrancy of its cinematography, Moonlight still has a tangibly made quality to it that reads as ecstatically cinematic. The diner scene is among the most tenderly rendered reunions in recent memory, and marks the best use of food in film this decade. –Danielle Rae Childs

Trevante Rhodes in “Moonlight”

Arrival (2016)

Arrival seems to achieve the impossible as a thoughtful and emotionally provocative film rooted in the sci-fi genre. Director Denis Villenueve designs a film absent of overdone thrills of the alien invasion drama, instead creating a philosophical and deeply human story filled with the necessary suspense the genre of the story demands. Amy Adams and Jeremy Renner uphold the narrative with attentive performances, helping to forge a cinematic piece of great introspection. –Isabella Colletta

Lady Bird (2017)

The 2010s saw young female interiority finally getting the screen time it deserves, and I’m comfortable giving most of the credit for this vital cinematic progression to Greta Gerwig. Lady Bird is basically a perfect film.  Incredibly well-paced and tonally sincere, Gerwig’s solo-directorial debut achieves peak emotional resonance because it leans in, relentlessly, to specificity of experience. It trusts that the personal can, given the right presentation, be universal. Not all of us are from Sacramento, and not all of us were taught by nuns in school, but I’m betting that for most of us, when Lady Bird’s screen faded to black, we felt the distinct urge to call our moms. –Danielle Rae Childs

Laurie Metcalf and Saoirse Ronan in “Lady Bird”

Dunkirk (2017) 

Christopher Nolan has had quite the run this last decade, releasing Inception, The Dark Knight Rises, Interstellar, and Dunkirk in the span of just seven years. You’ll forgive us for  picking only one Nolan film for our list, but Dunkirk is his masterpiece. Our boy finally learned how to make a movie under two hours and the brevity serves the story well, letting a film that many tried to funnel into the war movie genre, excel at being what it actually is: a relentlessly sensory depiction of survival.  Ever the staunch defender of shooting on film, Nolan, aided by cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema, broke new ground by strapping an IMAX camera to the wing of a spitfire plane to capture the film’s aerial dogfight scenes. This viewer can’t remember the last time she saw something so new on screen that wasn’t a product of CGI. We are all forever aesthetically indebted to Nolan/Hoytema for giving the world close-ups of clouds in 70mm. –Danielle Rae Childs

Roma (2018)

Roma made a significant name for itself at the 2018 Oscar’s as a streaming service entry, but it deserves its place on the list of films of the decade beyond the squabbles of streaming over screen for its moving presentation of the tragedy and loyalty of familial love. Alfonso Cuaron sketches out his memories of early childhood in 1970s Mexico; re-evaluating his own experiences through the narrative lenses of two women, working as maids within an upper class family home. Tensions are forged as all lives within the house are shown to be inseparably tangled, drawing out a sometimes vicious, sometimes heartwarming, emotional relationship. –Isabella Colletta

Yalitza Aparicio, Marina de Tavira, and Marco Graf in “Roma”

Oxford divided over trans rights, data suggests

0

Newly published polling data has indicated that Oxford citizens are divided over issues surrounding trans rights.

The data, published by the news website UnHerd in association with the polling company Focal Data, resulted from asking respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement “it is acceptable for adolescent children to make their own decisions about their gender identity.”

In the Oxford East constituency, 12% of people strongly agreed with the statement, 33% mildly agreed, 18% mildly disagreed, 9% strongly disagreed, and 28% remained undecided.

The attitude in Oxford West and Abingdon was less supportive, the data showing that 11% strongly agreed with the statement, 28% mildly agreed, 19% mildly disagreed, 11% strongly disagreed, and 31% remained undecided.

Both constituencies ranked in the top third of constituencies surveyed nationally in terms of support for the statement. Oxford East was ranked the 60th most supportive of the 632 constituencies surveyed, while Oxford West and Abingdon ranked as the 208th.

Though a plurality expressed support for the statement in both constituencies, a majority of respondents did not. Overall, only in seven constituencies across the United Kingdom (not including Northern Ireland), did a majority support the statement.

The publishing of this data comes after a slew of transphobic stickers were posted around Oxford city centre during Michaelmas, echoing similar campaigns around the world. The stickers included comments such as “Woman. Noun. Adult human female,” “women don’t have penises” and “auto-gynephilia.”

Home Office figures published in October showed an increase in hate crime during the 2018-19 year. The total of 2,333 transgender identity hate crimes represented an increase of 37% from 2017-18.

UnHerd and Focaldata utilised the technique Multilevel Regression with Post-Stratification (MRP) in order to collate their data. Using an online panel provider, data was collected from 21,119 respondents between January 15 and November 4. MRP does not produce separate individual constituency polls, but looks for patterns across constituencies in order to produce a result.

The Oxford Student Union’s LGBTQ campaign declined to comment for this story.

Oxford Retirement Policy Ruled Discriminatory by Tribunal

0

An Oxford University don has this week won a claim brought against the University after he was forced to retire aged 68.

The controversial policy enacted in 2011 (titled the EJRA) means that any senior University staff must retire by September 30th in the year before they turn 69. Exceptions can be made to the rule at the discretion of the University.

Oxford asserts that the policy is intended to “support the University’s mission to sustain excellence in teaching, research and administration and to maintain and develop its historical position as a world-class university”. It also makes the case that recent recruits are more diverse than existing academics, so the policy should improve diversity and equality amongst teaching staff.

 However, a recent employment tribunal found that Professor Paul Ewart, who was forced out of his job as head of the atomic and laser research physics at the Clarendon Laboratory, had been discriminated against based on his age. The tribunal also said that the University had failed to justify its retirement policy. It is understood that a similar policy is employed by the Universities of Cambridge and St Andrews, which will now be under pressure to re-evaluate their retirement procedure.

When contacted for comment, Mr Ewart told Cherwell that while he believes the objectives of improved diversity to be valuable, data has shown the policy to be an ineffective way of achieving these aims. He said: “The result means that my questioning of the university’s policy has been found by an impartial judicial verdict to have been well-founded. I have been pointing out the basic flaw in the policy for many years now starting with an article in the Oxford Magazine in 2016. I quote here from that article

“ ‘In particular the methods employed [compulsory retirement under the EJRA] were deemed to be not proportionate as the means of achieving the avowed aims. The aims themselves, such as creating opportunities for young scholars to enter the academic career path and to address issues of diversity and gender equality, etc. are worthy. So we, as an academic community, ought to seek to achieve them by proportionate means i.e. within the law that forbids discrimination on the basis of age. Judging proportionality need not be an entirely subjective exercise. It is important in framing a policy to do so on the basis of data and evidence.’

“The argument has been refined (the effect of the EJRA on the rate of creating vacancies is between 2 – 4%) and repeated in several OM articles and in debates in Congregation) but consistently ignored by the Administration and Council. The argument is also supported by the statistical data that I obtained from HESA (the Higher Education Statistics Agency) which demonstrated that there was no evidence to support the university’s claim that the EJRA was making a “substantial impact” on achieving the aims. This was confirmed by a rigorous statistical analysis by the university’s own Statistics Consultancy Service which provides statistical analysis to any member of the university.

“The judgement by the Tribunal has vindicated this as a key argument showing that the EJRA cannot ever be a proportionate means of achieving the aims and therefore it is unlawful.

“More importantly, the judgement should help the university reconsider its policy and allow active academics to continue to work if they so desire and to choose the time of their retirement as they are allowed to do in every other UK university except Oxford, Cambridge and St Andrew’s. I hope this will assist my colleagues to continue their valuable work, some of whom are doing world-leading research affecting the most important issues facing the planet such as climate change.”

Oxford did not make it immediately apparent that they would be revising the discriminatory policy. A spokesperson for the University said: “In light of this ruling the University will be considering its options, including the possibility of an appeal.”

The result for Mr Ewart follows a contrasting result from May, when a tribunal dismissed a case brought by Professor John Pitcher, a tutorial fellow at St John’s College, against Oxford University and St John’s College. The tribunal found that Prof Pitcher’s claims were “not well-founded”.

Over the course of the tribunal in May, Oxford acknowledged that the policy which forced John Pitcher’s retirement was direct age discrimination, but that the discrimination could be justified. To this end, the University had to show that the policy was a proportionate means of achieving legitimate aims. Mr Pitcher is currently in the process of appealing this decision.

It has also been revealed that the internal appeals court at the University found the retirement policy to be unjust as early as 2014. An appeal against the implementation of the policy with respect to Professor Denis Galligan was upheld by Dame Janet Smith, formerly of the High Court and Court of Appeal. Her written judgement stated that the process implemented by Oxford University was “fundamentally unacceptable”, and could “never amount to a potentially fair reason for dismissal.”

Mr Ewart will now receive back pay from the University for the time missed, but he is not guaranteed to be offered his job back at the Clarendon Laboratory. At the time of writing his position is listed as “Visitor” at the Oxford University Science Department.

In spite of this, he has informed Cherwell that he will be looking to retake employment at the Clarendon, saying “I will be seeking to be reinstated so that I can continue, in an employed basis, to work with colleagues in Engineering and Chemistry on applications of my research and to happily contribute to teaching in the university. I miss the interaction with students and graduate students now that my research group has evaporated. I hope that we can work together with the university to find a lawful and acceptable approach to retirement in the future that will be for the benefit of everyone – young and old(er)!”

UCU Reopens Pensions Negotiations

0

A failure to make progress on pay and pensions disputes could result in further strikes in 2020.

The University and College Union (UCU) has announced that talks between the Union, the Universities Superannuation Scheme, and Universities UK (representing employers) will reopen in the new year. Talks will concern a dispute over the USS pension, which staff say has been undervalued and poorly managed.

Employee contributions to the pensions scheme have risen from 6.5% in 2011 to 9.6% in 2019, and are set to rise a further 1.4% by 2021. Contributions from employers have also risen from 16% in 2011 to 21% in 2019.

Despite this, research published by the UCU appears to show that employees will receive almost £200,000 less in their retirement. The UCU argues that the valuation methodology used by the USS which resulted in these higher pension contributions is flawed.

The Joint Expert Panel (JEP), a panel established by UUK and the UCU to examine the valuation of Universities Superannuation Scheme, published a report on 13th December which made a number of recommendations for the scheme. These included changes to the governance of the scheme and the adoption of “a more appropriate valuation methodology”.

A spokesperson for the USS commented: “We look forward to engaging with UUK and UCU as they consider the recommendations from the JEP’s second report and welcome the commitment to meet early in the New Year.

“The recommendations in the report are ambitious in scope and will require careful consideration by all parties to agree how best to prioritise and progress them, alongside the timetable for the 2020 valuation.

“As our stakeholders know, we are already carrying out a significant and systematic review of the methodology for the next valuation and we look forward to understanding how employers and members views can be most clearly represented to the Trustee for the 2020 valuation.”

The dispute over the USS is one of two disputes which resulted in strike action at 60 universities last month. The UCU has also raised a dispute with the Universities and Colleges Employers Association (UCEA) over pay, equality, workload, and job security. The UCEA agreed to negotiations over the latter three issues, and both the UCEA and the UCU have agreed that constructive progress has been made. However, an unwillingness on the part of the UCEA to open discussions about pay has left the two bodies at an impasse.

If talks fail to make meaningful progress it seems likely that industrial action will continue into Hilary Term. University and College Union local associations at 25 universities across the country are currently preparing to ballot on further industrial action relating to the pensions dispute.

At Oxford, Union members voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action over pay and working conditions in November, with 74.4% of votes cast in favour of the action.

However, a similar ballot for action over the pensions dispute narrowly missed the 50% voter turnout required for the results of the ballot to be carried. Members will be re-balloted on the issue between the 7th and the 28th of January. If successful, UCU members in Oxford would have a mandate for industrial action with respect to both disputes.

While no further strike action has yet been encouraged by the UCU, organisers of the Liverpool UCU have already called for a further 14 days of strike action in the new year.

The UCU is also still encouraging members to participate in “action short of a strike” which includes working strictly to contract, and not covering for colleagues or catching up for work missed as a result of the strikes.

UUK said in a statement: “There is a strong desire from all parties to work closely together on the future direction of the scheme. We look forward to developing a joint approach between the union, the trustee and employers to consider and respond to the recommendations from the JEP’s second report, alongside the 2020 valuation of USS.

“Priorities include jointly agreeing a refreshed scheme purpose and valuation principles; reforming the governance; and exploring different approaches to the valuation methodology for 2020.”

And a merry christmess

0

It is hardly a ground-breaking revelation that Christmas is an extremely wasteful enterprise. I could reel off facts – over the period 6 million trees are discarded, 100 million bags of rubbish accumulate and apparently 17 million Brussel sprouts are thrown away (although I am dubious about how such a statistic is calculated). Regardless, the incomprehensible quantity of waste is bound to drive pangs of guilt into the conscience of even the most immoderate Christmas fanatic. Thus, most would prefer to remain ignorant of the facts, saving their ‘Earth is dying, so will we’ and ‘there is no planet B’ Instagram quotes for the new year. However, due to my mum’s insistent anti-palm oil venture, this year my family was not going to be among them. It would be a truly green Christmas, whatever that means.

Due to a lack of extended family (my parents are both only children), Christmas has always been a fairly small event – devoid of the stereotypical drunk uncle and wasted older cousins. Thank God. However, it is still by no stretch of the imagination, a relaxing time of the year. Having grown up in a vegetarian household with an abundance of fussy siblings, the classic Christmas spread of turkey, Brussel sprouts and pigs in blankets were never on the cards. Instead, we always ate a rather experimental veggie dinner on Christmas eve, where nut roast was served alongside pasta and cucumber sticks to appease my pernickety youngest sister. A meal that would probably plunge the Christmas traditionalist into a state of abject horror. It is miraculous that for a holiday that celebrates individual relationships, it is entirely depersonalised by unspoken rules. Where the regimented order of the day – waking up, going for a walk, eating a typically excessive Christmas dinner, opening presents – is followed so stringently that the rarity of spending time with all your family is taken for granted.

This sentiment was certainly far from my mind when I was vilified in the little Miss and Mr men game – the ‘let-your-food-settle’ break before pudding. While everyone unanimously agreed that my oldest sister was ‘everyone’s dream partner’ and ‘has no annoying traits whatsoever’, I received the rather humbling characterisation of most likely to ‘laugh if you fell over in front of me’. It is expected that at Christmas, the most stressful time of the year, that you will encounter everybody’s worst sides. It is unexpected, however, that such flaws will be exposed when you are dubbed as Mr Mean in a children’s personality quiz. A game that I am unlikely to be replaying at uni. 

 To stick to the ‘waste-free’ Christmas agenda, paper crackers were abandoned in favour of my sister’s handmade alternative. I quickly got over the disappointment of being unable to ‘crack’ the cracker, which was woollen and definitely uncrackable, when I pulled out the personalised ‘joke’. I think my sister certainly had an ulterior motive in writing said ‘jokes’; like the little Miss and Mr game they hit rather too close to home. My dad’s asked, rather long-windedly, what an old snowman was -‘water’- in case you were wondering. My little sister’s was a joke about the reindeer that wouldn’t stop talking. Loud protest to this from her only served as a vocal demonstration of the obvious – that she deserved the rep of little Miss Chatterbox. Mine said quite simply ‘Four story lines were cut out of Love Actually and Kiera Knightley’s was still included’. A critique, thankfully for once, not of me but of Knightley’s empty, one dimensional character in Love Actually and the rather frustrating and implausible story line that she is part of.   

All in all, the meal was a success – no one stormed out of the room, the lack of turkey meant there could be no food poisoning and the only victim of the palm-free parade were the mince pies which had sadly been axed from the table. An absentee that gave my mum ample opportunity to say the classic ‘why do *mince pies* (-INSERT FOOD OF CHOICE FOR VARIETY-) have palm oil in them?’. I wisely abstained from mentioning the three mince pies I had consumed at a carol concert earlier that week. Such set the trend for the ‘palm-oil’ and ‘fragrance-free’ soap that I found at the bottom of my stocking. ‘Palm-oil free’, my sister whispered darkly to me, was simply a euphemism for ‘fun-free’. She had a point. But at 6am (there was no lie in on Christmas day), I was more annoyed about being woken up ridiculously early than the ‘fragrance-free’ soap.

This was all quickly forgotten when I walked downstairs and saw an apparition in a Santa suit in the hallway. My first thought was public embarrassment. Since walking through town with my fully-costumed family, beards included, during the Santa run a few years ago I retained a nervous horror that someone I knew would recognise my mum bedecked as Santa and think I was associated.

“You’re surely not going outside like that”, I said, forgetting it was Christmas and imagining the painful scenarios that could ensue if my mum stepped outside in a Santa suit.

“We’re going to parkrun”, my mum replied. Promptly two more Santas appeared – my dad and brother – who had trailed downstairs to join the cult. Turns out all three were cycling to the park. It was worse than I could’ve envisaged. Images of my parents, fully-dressed as Santas, precariously balanced on bikes swam before my eyes. What was even worse was the idea of doing exercise on Christmas day. I joined my younger sister in the living room and by the time my parents returned we had consumed both of our Lindt reindeers and were sat playing Wii sports. A pain-free alternative to real exercise. It was Christmas after all and New Year’s resolutions could happily wait until January.

For as I long I could remember, we have always taken turns to open presents. This year I learnt the hard way that the time taken unwrapping was considerably increased by ‘waste-free Christmas’. Rather than dramatically ripping off the paper and throwing it across the room, ‘waste-free Christmas’ demanded that every present be meticulously cut open with scissors and the wrapping paper neatly laid in pile. The agonised suspense of watching my dad carefully flattening the wrapping paper and peeling off the Sellotape, so as ‘to use again next year’ seemed such a farce that I became rebellious and began ripping the paper randomly amid a chorus of voices lamenting the dying trees. All the time I was watched reproachfully by the wooden reindeer that stands near the fireplace. The antlers, which had been embedded in my sisters’ leg after she had jumped onto the reindeer ten years ago, served as a stark reminder to heed my mum’s warning. I stopped ripping the wrapping paper and abandoned myself to ‘waste-free Christmas’.

It is hardly surprising that by the afternoon, hot chocolate had been replaced by alcohol. Gin, to be exact, which me and my sister poured carefully into a plastic bottle and took with us to evensong to ‘get through’ the rather tedious sermons. Having watched my little sister, a chorister, sing in the cathedral on numerous occasions there was nothing particularly novel about evensong – this is one I will remember. We received some rather odd looks from the woman behind us – she was probably curious why my sister was so dehydrated and swigging on a water bottle. Yet we were there singing carols with everyone else, joining in the Christmas spirit. There should be no rules at Christmas. Just this once you can drink gin and tonic in a cathedral. We don’t need to follow the conventional excessiveness. If you want to spend ten minutes cutting open a present, then go ahead. Don’t worry, a ‘waste-free’ Christmas is by no means ‘fun-free’.