An outdated view of how much control an academic has over their own schedule is hampering efforts to address chronic problems with overwork in UK higher education, according to a study.

Many institutions could be breaking the law in the terms and conditions they offer staff because of the?assumption ¨C accepted by both unions and employers ¨C that scholars are exempt from the 48-hour cap on a working week, averaged over 17 weeks, because they are ¡°autonomous workers¡±, finds the paper, published in the University and College Union¡¯s?.

Academics ¨C and some senior professional services staff ¨C are being denied the universal protection against what is a still ¡°eye-wateringly high maximum¡± number of working hours because they are seen as having sufficient control of their working practices, akin to a managing director of a company, author Alastair Smith told?Times ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø.

¡°It sounds intuitively plausible: academics do a little of what they want, when they want, but I think in reality the technicalities are that that doesn¡¯t apply at all,¡± said Dr Smith, a former associate professor at the University of Warwick who is now founding director and chair of teaching and learning at a new venture, known as the Community for Alternative Thought, Learning and Action in Nature.

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

¡°Maybe in the 1960s, academics were very much like managing directors, but the situation has changed dramatically since then and workloads have become very intentionally directed,¡± he added.

The paper says it is ¡°self-evident¡± no university staff member aside from perhaps a vice-chancellor has ¡°total control¡± over their activities, with timetabled classes and meetings being the ¡°most obvious¡± activities directed by their employers.

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

However, the exemption from the cap has formed the basis of sector-wide agreements such as the?post-92 contract, Dr Smith said, which he believes prevents academics from challenging the wider culture of academic overwork.

While there is limited data on the number of hours academics work in a week, which Dr Smith said is part of the problem,?surveys?have shown many routinely say they?work more than 50 hours a week, with that number rising for early career researchers and other more vulnerable staff members.

Dr Smith¡¯s research identified three broad levels of compliance with working time regulations across different institutions¡¯ terms and conditions, with anecdotal evidence showing that newer universities with more of a teaching focus tend to be better.

The best, he said, specify that anyone working more than a 35-hour week should be given time off in lieu, while others use vaguer wording that staff should ¡°work the number of hours required but not excessively¡±, which is not defined.

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

A third type of employer, according to Dr Smith, states that academic work is ¡°not restricted by work time regulations¡± and actively says ¡°you can work as many hours as you want¡±.

Dr Smith said he was hopeful that universities would look at their current arrangements and voluntarily agree to consider changing their terms and conditions.

Otherwise, a successful legal challenge could establish a precedent and ¡°create a bit of a cascade¡±, he said, but this would require a case being brought to the Health and Safety Executive, which oversees the legislation.

Anyone who did feel sufficiently in control of their schedule ¨C or who wanted to work more than 48 hours per week ¨C could opt out, as is provided for in the legislation, Dr Smith said.

ºÚÁϳԹÏÍø

tom.williams@timeshighereducation.com