A protest took place outside Linacre College on Monday evening in support of a former kitchen worker who has brought an employment tribunal claim against the college over allegations of racism, bullying, and unsafe working conditions.

Around 60 people gathered outside the college from 5.30pm, holding signs reading “Justice for Joe” and “I stand with Joe”. Protestors also chanted “shame” towards the college. 

The protest followed allegations concerning a former employee, known as “Joe” for the tribunal, who worked at the college for 26 years. Joe has alleged that a manager referred to him using racist language, mocked his Caribbean accent, and attempted to force him out of his job. He also claims that he was required to wear unsuitable footwear, and alleges that this contributed to him developing gangrene, which ultimately resulted in the amputation of his leg. Joe also claims that a senior member of staff visited him whilst in hospital, pulled the sheet back from his leg and said, “I want to see if it is true that your leg has been amputated”. An employment tribunal is due to consider the case later this month.

Linacre College has strongly denied the allegations. In an email sent to college members ahead of the protest, and shared with Cherwell, Principal Dr Nick Leimu-Brown described the allegations as “extremely serious” but said that the College “rejects those allegations and disputes the claims that have been made”. Leimu-Brown also wrote: “The demonstration has been organised under the slogan ‘Justice for Joe’. Whatever views individuals may hold about the case, I hope we can all agree that genuine justice depends upon a fair and independent hearing of the evidence. I would encourage everyone involved to respect the legal process that is already underway. Justice is never served by heated argument on social media.” He added that the matter was subject to ongoing legal proceedings and that “the truth of the claims are for an Employment Tribunal to determine”. 

Linacre has also previously emphasised the College’s commitment to diversity and maintaining an inclusive working environment for all staff, which doesn’t tolerate racism or discrimination.

Several speakers addressed the crowd during the protest. One of the speakers was Professor Gus John, a race equality campaigner who studied at Oxford. Addressing the crowd, John described Joe’s alleged treatment as “a form of lynching” and argued that “racism kills and it kills instantly and it kills slowly”. He told protesters that Joe’s experience represented “a slow and deliberate lynching”. 

John also told Cherwell that it was “absolutely appalling that a university college could be treating an employee in this way” and argued that it was “absolutely essential that we understand how long we’ve been on this road in our struggle against racism”. He also called for campaigners to remain “committed for the long haul”.

The organiser, Dan, told Cherwell that the protest served two purposes: to show that “the community is behind you”, and to send a message that “the community is watching” the college. He added that Linacre should “acknowledge, apologise, and atone for the harm they have done to Joe” and provide compensation if the allegations are upheld.

Geoff Taylor, a retired teacher at St Clare’s in Summertown and UCU member, said he had attended because of the “abominable treatment of Joe”, and repeated the trade union principle that “an injury to one is an injury to all”. Carole Scott from Oxford Stand Up to Racism told Cherwell that campaigners “have to stand in solidarity with those who have suffered racist abuse”.

Multiple speakers also criticised the lack of action from Joe’s union, UNISON, in providing legal support in the tribunal. In his speech, Professor John described a lack of support for Black workers from parts of the trade union movement, labelling UNISON as “a disgrace” and arguing that it was “ignoring the humanity of it all”. Cherwell has been unable to verify these claims of incorrect handling of the case within UNISON and discriminatory treatment by the union. UNISON refused to comment to Cherwell, “as this is still an active case with ongoing proceedings”.  

Several attendees also said they planned to raise Joe’s case within their local branches. Peter Cann, a retired member of the National Union of Journalists and UNISON, told Cherwell that he would be calling on both his NUJ branch and local UNISON branches to condemn what he described as an “appalling act”, and said he would ask his UNISON branch to examine the role of union officials in Joe’s case.

The demonstration was also attended by multiple local councillors. Oxford City Councillor for Holywell (the ward that Linacre sits in), Dr Dianne Regisford, told Cherwell she was there to show “support and solidarity” and was calling for “a full investigation into the allegations”. Oxfordshire County Councillor for Linacre Emma Garnett also described the allegations as “absolutely horrific”.

Very few students were in attendance at the protest, but one told Cherwell that she was “standing in solidarity with Joe” and wanted to ensure that more students were aware of the issue and “how relevant it is to us as participants in the institution”. Otilia, a Linacre student attending the protest, told Cherwell that she hoped students within the college would consider what action they could take, adding that this case conflicted with Linacre’s public commitment to diversity. 

It’s been four years since England men lost to France at the quarter finals in Qatar. Since then, the women have won the Euros twice – in 2021 and 2025 – bringing football home for our success-starved nation: it would be amazing if England could repeat this success in this tournament too. 

However, when approaching the 2026 World Cup in North America, my thoughts don’t drift towards football. I’ve barely considered the players in our squad or our chances at success. In fact, the game itself has taken a backseat. Instead, the politics, headlines, and contentious issues that we’ve already seen in the build-up have dominated the discussion. With all these different factors at play, concern trumps any excited anticipation in the build-up to the tournament.

There are plenty of places to start when considering the disarray of this World Cup, but I think a relatively simple place to start would be with the fans. Supporters are the very essence of football. Whilst there can certainly be issues, the majority of fans merely want their team to win. For this reason, the ticket prices for this tournament are completely unfair to these loyal fan bases. Back in December, FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) announced that the cheapest tickets for the final would still cost over £3000. Naturally, this is completely unrealistic for many football fans, now left with no chance  to watch their team play. This doesn’t even consider their devotion in terms of flight, accommodation, and transportation costs. In fact, even the president himself said that he wouldn’t pay to watch the US play Paraguay in the group stage.

The frustration in terms of profit still runs even further. One of the new features in this year’s tournament is ‘Hydration Breaks’. In other tournaments, so that high temperatures don’t have a negative effect on players, time is allocated for athletes to rehydrate. However, these breaks have been introduced as a compulsory requirement for every match in this tournament, regardless of whether they are playing indoors or outdoors, in a conditioned or unconditioned stadium. This means that matches will only be played for 22 minutes before a break, which some have noticed aligns these games more closely with American football. 

On the face of it, these breaks may seem beneficial to the players. However, the Guardian has found that this offers FIFA more than 200 guaranteed slots for advertising. Naturally, more advertising allows for only more revenue. This brings into question, then, whether FIFA is truly concerned about the safety of the players, or simply just its own profit boost. Whilst the decision could, of course, be informed by both, it does suggest that FIFA’s goal in this tournament is to severely boost the revenue they receive, despite the rules of the sport and the loyalty of the fans. This is further endorsed when considering the high ticket prices.

Additionally, many stadiums have had to change their names temporarily for the tournament. Some originally had brands as their stadium names, such as the Mercedes-Benz Stadium. However, in order not to hand out free advertising to companies which aren’t sponsoring the tournament, the names have been changed to generic city names. Mercedes-Benz Stadium, for example, is to be known as the Atlanta Stadium for the duration of the World Cup this year. Though this may not have a direct impact on the game itself, it once again highlights that capital is premium in this tournament is decentralising and almost displacing the very essence of the game for wealth-snatching tactics.

Furthermore, the World Cup, for the first time, is taking place across an entire continent. Whilst that may be an exciting part of football history,  the sheer size of the continent also provides something of a logistical nightmare. The tournament will take place across four time zones, with some stadiums up to almost 3000 miles apart. Frustrating for fans, who want to see their teams once they’ve passed the group stage, the sheer cost of travel is something that won’t be easily managed – especially alongside the already extortionate ticket prices. Secondly, it’s a long way to go for the players, who will have to travel wide expanses to play their next match. Even if this may affect all players, it does add a degree of difficulty, considering that 104 games will be taking place across 39 days. The excitement of such international hosting is somewhat lessened when visualising the tricky logistics for both fans and teams.

Moreover, there remains an ongoing concern over ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) raids in the USA. Even back in January, the FSE (Football Supporters Europe) fan group expressed concern over such events. There have also been concerns, in light of these raids, over fans’ personal safety when travelling to the US. Supporters have no reason for their fears to be alleviated, as Todd Lyons (director of ICE) expressed that the enforcement group’s presence was a necessary part of the World Cup. With regular stories on the news and social media, it’s no wonder that fans – forced to constantly consider their own safety – are sceptical about the role that ICE will play in the tournament.

Concerns have also been raised over new security checks for fans entering the country. Back in December, President Donald Trump announced security checks that would involve checking tourists’ social media accounts. This affects 42 countries, one of which is the UK, in the interest of the safety of Americans. However, according to the Guardian, the FSE described the new measure as “profoundly unacceptable”. This is just another step in an already difficult journey to the US, possibly compelling fans to hand over access to their social media histories dating back up to five years. This could be seen not only as an invasion of privacy, but also as a policing of private lives – another deterrent to devoted fans.

According to BBC Sport, the American Hotel & Lodging Association (AHLA) has had up to 70% of FIFA-reserved rooms cancelled in major cities like Los Angeles, Boston, Dallas, and more. When considering all these factors, it can’t be a shock that reservations are being cancelled. This tournament no longer focuses on the game itself, removing the very passion of the sport and replacing it with a fear of the political and economic climate. Football is not the focus of this World Cup.

Yet, I hold some hope. Whilst writing this article, the England squads have been announced. This may not be relevant to everyone, but as a Three Lions fan, I was surprised to see some of the changes that have been made to the team. Greats from previous tournaments such as Foden, Maguire, and Alexander-Arnold are all missing out on the chance to bring football home in this World Cup. And whilst that may be a questionable move, it finally brings the discussion back towards football. On top of that, Shakira has released a promising official World Cup song once again, saving the day with ‘Dai Dai’. With her reappearance comes the return of the nostalgia of previous tournaments.

The fate of the World Cup is undecided. The atmosphere around the tournament is certainly focused on everything other than football, with political, economic, and social matters drawing away the attention of fans. However, we’re being gradually tugged towards the game itself, hopefully shifting the atmosphere towards a more positive, football-focused one. Whilst we don’t know what’s to come, I do know that fans will be brought together in the spirit of the game, and that’s what it’s truly about.

It’s no secret that Oxford has long been an idealised location for film sets; official-looking SUVs with blacked-out windows and attendants in high vis parading up and down Catte Street and around the Rad Cam are a not-unfamiliar sight. What’s missing from a lot of representations of Oxford in film, however, is a more nuanced take on the student perspective. It makes sense, then, that a key aim of the Oxford University Filmmaking Foundations’ anthology project, ‘The Oxford Tales’, was to platform the plethora of student talent at the university. 

The screening of the five films in the anthology responding to the theme ‘Oxford Tales’ was the culmination of a process which had been underway since September 2024, and took place at the Schwarzman Centre on Friday, 22nd May. I was fortunate to be invited by Charlie James, creator of the project and president of OUFF from 2024-25. James informed me that ‘The Oxford Tales’ has been the ‘largest student film project in Oxford’s history’, involving around 136 students in the actual filmmaking process, in addition to the 100 who submitted scripts for the competition. The project is also notable because of the names it has behind it – acting as mentors for the project were Mike Newell, director of Four Weddings and a Funeral and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, and Cleone Clarke, who produced The Father and Loving Vincent. Following the scriptwriting competition, which saw five scripts selected by the directors, Kenneth Lonergan (Manchester By the Sea, Gangs of New York) led a script development session. 

With a celebrity heritage consisting of actors like Hugh Grant and Imogen Stubbs, the OUFF isn’t exactly a stranger to attracting such attention, but what is clear is the joint enthusiasm Newell and Clarke had for this project. Originally invited by OUFF to give a talk, Newell commented that he found that the “appetite” for filmmaking in the Oxford student sphere was such that he was inspired to offer a filmmaking masterclass, and from there, the idea of ‘The Oxford Tales’ anthology began to develop. Prior to the screening, Newell expressed enthusiasm about the idea of this project kickstarting a “movement” which could potentially spread to other universities: “It would be a real waste” if this was the only time such a project took place, he commented, and was matched in his enthusiasm by Clarke, who remarked that it was an “honour” to be involved in the project. 

The atmosphere before the screening was tense, to say the least. Collected in front of the entrance to the cinema in the main atrium of the Schwarzman, some students buzzed excitedly about the process and Newell and Clarke’s attendance, eager to talk to the film giants, whilst others baulked at the prospect of seeing their film on the big screen for the first time. As Newell commented, seeing your own film is “horrible”, but at the same time, it can be “tremendously invigorating” to see the result. 

The films themselves covered a range of topics and genres, such as the horror-comedy Food For Thought, which told the story of an English student, Myra (Irisa Kwok) who, after nurturing suspicions that her tutorial partner Victor (Gilon Fox) isn’t quite what he seems, discovers that his desire to “consume” knowledge has led him to, literally, eat books. This obsession quickly turns dark, leading him to murder (and presumably, cannibalise) their tutor. Following the same comedic inclinations was the mockumentary-style film Hinkssie, in which the Oxford University Loch Ness Monster Sighting Society (OULNMSS), headed by the overzealous Jacob Beaumont (Zee Lloyd-Elliot), will do anything they can to get funding for their trip to Loch Ness – after numerous hiccups, their fortunes finally reverse after they fish a severed hand out of Hinksey Lake, using the diamond ring on one of the fingers to fund their trip. Cherwell even gets a mention, apparently describing the society as “monster freaks”. 

Comedy indeed seemed the favoured genre across the anthology, with the slapstick Free Drinks (in, exchange for as we are told by a note on the door to a college bar, “items stolen from other colleges”) taking the crown for most absurdity – starting off tame, the spoils become progressively more daring, including “Brasenose fourth year classicist’s hair”, and an actual dog (played expertly by Keble’s Rievaulx). The quest for free booze, mingled with the specific flavour of rivalry particular to the Oxford collegiate system (or, perhaps, that of 20-somethings desperate for a free pint) inevitably ends in a chaotic bar brawl-stroke-bloodbath. Following a simple but effective concept, the directors also emphasised the collaborative nature of the process, commenting that she encouraged the crew to contribute their own ideas during filming. 

It wasn’t always a smooth process, though. Boyi Li, one of the directors of Hinkssie, recalled the challenges of navigating numerous issues such as dead batteries and volatile weather; budget was another issue, with the producers having to be creative about which sets they used – one of the library scenes in Food For Thought, for example, was clearly filmed in two different locations, whilst the directors of Thursday (Julia M. Schaub and Sophie Duffin-Jones) had to combat scheduling conflicts and the Herculean task of creating a believable hospital set on a miniscule budget. But, as one of the directors of Free Drinks, Marnie Rodriguez-Skellon, remarked, “with constraints come creativity”, and this was particularly true for Freshers, which utilised various spots around St John’s College, a montage of blurry club photographs from a film camera and the streets of Oxford for its set. The final scene, filmed in what appeared to be a back street somewhere between Merton and Corpus Christi, was particularly moving; as a group of carolers sing softly in the background, huddled under the light of a street lamp, the protagonist William (Ezana Betru) contemplates a poster for the Acapella Society, thus taking up an interest which the chaos of fresher’s week had threatened to quash. 

Whilst all five scripts were undoubtedly strong, some of the dialogue risked slipping into Oxford stereotypes in sounding overdone or hackneyed. When in Food For Thought, Myra accuses Victor of being a “pillaging coloniser”, for instance, I couldn’t help but wince; similarly, describing Fresher’s week as “my week of anarchy, my week of wonder” in Freshers didn’t quite hit the satirical mark it had hoped to. Yet there were plenty of golden moments – the tutorial discussions were fast-paced and intense, whilst gleefully capturing the caricature of the overblown literature student (Victor’s argument for the “pseudo-liminal performance of femininity” in Chaucer was almost painfully apt). Similarly, Adrian C. Smith as the tutor, Dr Pemberton, perfectly rendered a character closer to a camp Boris Johnson, whose indignant protest, “you’d expect this at Cambridge!” as he is strangled drew easy laughter from the audience. 

The standout for me, though, was Thursday, which brought the genre of the medical drama to the otherwise comedy-dominated lineup. The film followed medical student Anna (Caeli Colgan) on her night shift, dealing with a busy triage and run-of-the-mill cases such as an older patient suffering from indigestion. Tragedy strikes, however, when a young woman is brought in to A&E after being hit by a car, cycling home from her own placement at a local hospital. Anna is forced to confront the horrific truth that, had she been in the wrong place at the wrong time, this could have been her; after the patient is lost, Anna returns to triage, with the sounds of the hospital rising with her emotional distress, carefully straddling the line between intra and extra diegetic.

Though Thursday throws the pressures faced by NHS workers into sharp relief, the film does not stray too far from the theme of ‘The Oxford Tales’, as it also explores the difficulty of establishing strong relationships in both a university and working environment. We watch as Anna struggles to engage a fellow placement student in conversation after her shift; similarly, returning to her usual study spot with coursemate Mike (Alex Brogan) at her college library, we wonder if she will finally be able to open up to him about her experience, but such a hope is dashed as the mounting hospital noises in her head abruptly stop as she begins typing. What the film also achieves, then, is contributing to a discourse about the isolating experience of medical students and the importance of close friendships to navigate the challenging early stages of their careers. Thursday looks beyond the classic Oxford themes seen in film, imagining a life after it which is jarringly separate from its honey-coloured college walls and student rivalries. 

After leaving the screening, I couldn’t help but agree with Newell – it would indeed be a shame if the project were to happen only once. OUFF’s ‘The Oxford Tales’ has brought the diverse and captivating talents of this university’s students to life, and I sincerely hope, in the future, that they will be brought to an even bigger screen.