Three students intend to sue the University of Stirling for discrimination after 13 were suspended for standing in solidarity with striking staff last term.
The group took part in an occupation of the management building which resulted in the suspension of 10 students from all university facilities except the medical centre for eight weeks and indefinitely for three students.
The university said that the disciplinary action was taken because of an alleged breach of campus health and safety rules and that lives were placed at risk by the student group.
The three students claim that they were "pro-health and safety" and were raising awareness of the "university’s failure to respect the health, safety and wellbeing of its students and staff alike". They further claim that they implemented the health and safety advice given to them.
READ MORE: Staff walk out 15 Scottish universities as strike action takes effect
Three of the students, Eliot Wooding-Sherwin, Cian Lloyd Ireland and Daniel McPadden took legal advice and their Solicitor, Daniel Donaldson of Legal Spark Solicitors in Glasgow, wrote to the university today.
Donaldson said: “The university has not acted reasonably; it is likely that the University has behaved unlawfully and has applied draconian sanctions in victimisation – in pure retaliation for the protest – not because of any health and safety reason
“Sanctioning the students is grossly disproportionate; it is a breach of human rights law.
“Unlawful discrimination is prohibited by the Equality Act 2010.
“There is no evidence that the university protected the students’ philosophical beliefs regarding solidarity and trade unionism.
“It also appears the university discriminated in disability by association; namely that the students were protesting campus mental health.
"The university should be mindful that the legal bill from any court action will be substantial, and could affect the financial viability of the University"
A university spokesperson said: “The safety and wellbeing of our university community is of paramount importance, and the fire risk posed has been the central consideration during the disciplinary process. While that process and any appeals continue, no students involved are required to vacate university accommodation.
“While the disciplinary process is ongoing, the university will not speculate on the outcome.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel