University press faces legal challenge from exam writers

Legal representatives are preparing to file a lawsuit against a prominent academic publishing organization, acting for exam writers who contend that their employment status was unfairly altered. These 12 writers are employed by Cambridge University Press & Assessment (CUP&A), an entity that characterizes itself as a “world-leader in assessment, education, research and academic publishing”. The Society of Authors (SoA), which functions as a trade union for professional writers, has alleged that “mis-categorisation” occurred in contracts distributed to individuals earlier this year, leading to the denial of several workplace entitlements, such as equitable holiday pay. A spokesperson representing CUP&A stated: “Our assessors received improved terms under new contracts earlier this year, which the claimants agreed to.” The union asserts that, in certain instances, these problems have persisted for as long as three decades. It was reported that exam writers received a new contract, approximately in April this year, which suggested that CUP&A intended to formally recognize them as workers. According to the union, the writers were informed that they would not receive any additional commissions from the company unless they accepted the new conditions. Around this period, their eligibility for holiday pay was fixed at 12.07%, aligning with the statutory minimum, while the hourly compensation for at least a portion of their tasks was lowered, leading to a net financial detriment for some employees, as per the SoA. Legal counsel has contended that the modifications implemented by CUP&A were unjust, given that the writers had consistently been eligible for holiday pay, and thus, effectively experienced a reduction in their wages. They further stated that this was among several contractual revisions that placed the workers in a less advantageous situation compared to their prior circumstances. All 12 individuals pursuing the claim affixed their signatures to the new contract in May 2024. It is asserted that the conditions of the preceding agreement did not accurately reflect the genuine nature of the relationship between the writers and their employer, and that their legal entitlements have been violated. Ryan Bradshaw, a human rights solicitor from the law firm Leigh Day, commented: “These exam writers have been denied fundamental rights that should have been afforded to them all along.” He continued: “Our claim seeks to rectify the situation by ensuring that their employment status is properly recognised and that they receive the fair treatment and compensation they deserve.” Bradshaw added: “The adjustments made by CUP&A under the guise of belatedly complying with their legal obligations were, in reality, a thinly veiled pay cut.” He concluded: “It is regrettable that our clients felt forced to sign these contracts under pressure of losing work which they had diligently and professionally carried out over many years.” Sarah Burton, the deputy chief executive of the SoA, remarked: “We are disappointed that Cambridge University Press & Assessment has chosen not to resolve this matter directly with our members and the SoA, and that it has been necessary to proceed with a legal claim.”