Staff have accepted below-inflation pay offers for the last few years but the derisory offer this year was the last straw. Perhaps employers thought that, having accepted low offers before, staff would accept this one. Or perhaps the Government suggested to them that if they offer a rise low enough to provoke a strike, employers will have the excuse to impose individual settlements - breaking national pay bargaining. The removal of national bargaining in the NHS has been crucial in weakening opposition to Government cuts to the health service and it would be convenient to break national agreements in the higher education sector too.

Universities have changed almost beyond recognition over the last decade:

• The reclassification of many polytechnics as "new" universities increased the number of places available in higher education, prompting greater competition between institutions for applicants.
• The Government set strict targets for increased student numbers, adding to the competition for places. Failure to meet these targets bears severe financial penalties.
• The need to recruit and retain more students has inevitably adjusted teaching techniques to accommodate students with a greater variety of abilities and experience in classes which are larger than ever before.

The Government has not increased its funding to institutions to match the increased students numbers and therefore universities have succeeded in providing for greater numbers of students only through the hard work of their staff. Increased student numbers have an impact on staff at every level, from catering staff in the refectory, to Registry staff keeping track of more students, to Heads of Department trying to balance the research needs of their staff against teaching requirements. Most institutions have been reviewing staffing levels. Many services have been contracted out, resulting in reduced job security, lower wages and worse terms and conditions. At Queen Mary & Westfield College we have seen many posts frozen, delays in advertising vacancies, posts advertised at grades below that of the previous post-holder and refusal to consider regrading.

With staff coping with greater workloads and levels of responsibility (and a resulting increase in stress-related illness) you might have thought that they deserved recognition, gratitude and a decent pay rise. However, the employers' first and final offer this year was:

• 2.5% increase for manual staff (the basic rate for all manual staff is less than the TUC's recommended minimum wage of &pound4.26 an hour)
• 1.5% increase for academic, academic-related and all other support staff (an average rise of just 10p an hour for all support staff, one third of whom earn less than the European Decency Threshold).

The employers did not even attempt to justify this offer so they should not be surprised that their staff are not prepared to accept it. Enough is enough.