Over 250 RMIT staff gathered outside the University Council.

Sign the petition to support staff.

RMIT University staff will be protesting outside the University Council meeting on Monday 24 August, in response to the failure of senior management to deliver a reasonable collective agreement, the National Tertiary Education Union said today.

“Council and management are committed to a grand program for new buildings. It’s time they followed through with a commitment to staff,” said RMIT NTEU Branch President and academic Neil Robinson. “We’ve been in bargaining since mid last year. Management undertook to reach agreement with us by the end of July – but at the end of July they hadn’t even made us a pay offer.”

RMIT staff have suffered through successive rounds of funding cuts, staff cuts, redundancies and hiring freezes. Class sizes have grown, workloads have increased.

“We deserve more respect from the university,” said Liam Ward, a sessional academic at RMIT. “Casual and sessional staff have been exploited for too long. It’s time management recognised what we do for students.”

The RMIT staff union is concerned that the delay in reaching a new collective agreement will adversely affect the University’s competitiveness.

“RMIT aspires to be in the top band of universities. Our pay and conditions now are barely competitive – if we fall behind we will lose colleagues to other universities and we certainly won’t attract the best and brightest to work here,” Mr Robinson said.

General staff are also very concerned that RMIT senior management are trying to change the span of hours and shift arrangements, so that staff could be required to work late at night or on weekends without penalty rates.

Mr Robinson said: “How are staff supposed to balance work and family responsibilities if they can be called in to work on weekends without any compensation?”

The NTEU is trying to reach an agreement that delivers:

• Fair workloads;
• Job security;
• Competitive salaries;
• Protection of general staff conditions, especially span of hours and redundancy;
• Investment in staff – not just in buildings.

Stop work and photo opportunity

4 Hour Stop Work: Monday 24 August, from 2pm, at RMIT City Campus, Bowen St

2pm-3pm: Music with Matt Gleeson, RMIT student and local musician

3:15pm-3:40pm: Speakers including Ted Murphy (NTEU National Assist. Sec) and Brian Boyd (Trades Hall Sec)

3:45pm: March to RMIT Council meeting, at Building 20, Cnr Russell St and La Trobe St

4pm-5pm: BBQ and more music

For further information contact:

Neil Robinson, President, NTEU RMIT Branch

Phone: 0417 359 921

Photo via Twitpic.

Download the Freedom of Information documents (part 1 here; part 2 here)

The recently released FOI documents show that as recent a 30 January 2009 Victoria University Council were vigorously discussing the option of a merger with LaTrobe University. This was kept secret from students and staff and the western region community.

Moreover in Sept 2008 VU’s Vice Chancellor, Liz Harman, considered swapping VU’s Psychology courses for La Trobe University’s Sport Science courses. The idea was dropped when it was realised it was not a good deal financially. The NTEU finds it of particular concern for two reasons.

Firstly, this is a proposal being aired by the VC of a University with a legislated mission to provide tertiary education to the people living in the western region of Melbourne. VU also sees itself as working to meet the broader needs of the western region community, which performs poorly on a range of socio-economic/health indices and has large unmet needs in professional areas relating to psychology and welfare. Why would such a University voluntarily cease to produce graduates with a strong psychology background for a range of relevant helping professions? Why would it voluntarily cease to provide graduates with PhD, professional doctoral and master’s degrees in counselling, clinical, health and community psychology? How would abolishing VU Psychology be consistent with the development of the VU Health Precinct?

Secondly, any proposal to eliminate a whole group from a University leads one to think that perhaps that area is problematic or not contributing. Is this the case with Psychology? No. Psychology continues to be one of the most attractive areas for new students within the University, with over 600 enrolled in 2009 first year classes. Its graduate ratings in the latest Good University Guide place it at the forefront of all psychology courses in Victoria. It has a high proportion of higher degree (RTS) places – about a third of the total number within the Faculty. Research publication rates are healthy, collaborative links with the community strong and in the four years from 2004 to 2007 researchers in the School of Psychology brought in over $1.5 million in external grant income. It has one of the highest ratios of research active staff in the University and psychology doctoral students typically dominate at graduation ceremonies – seven will graduate in mid 2009. In 2008 the School which includes psychology finished with a very healthy financial surplus.

The question we must ask ourselves is why would a VC with sound judgement consider offloading an enterprise which is contributing so successfully to the University’s mission? Are we seeing evidence of a different agenda here – an agenda that would downgrade VU as a place that seeks to meet the needs of the community of the western region? Or are we seeing evidence of a VC with very poor judgement? Perhaps both.

On Wednesday March 4 at well attended general meeting of NTEU members it was resolved with one abstention and no opposed votes that:

“This meeting of NTEU members is outraged by the university management’s withdrawal from collective bargaining negotiations.

We demand the immediate resumption of negotiations and an indication of management’s intentions on this by Friday 13 March

In the event that management fails to agree to meet by the 16th of March, this meeting calls on the Branch Committee to convene a members’ meeting on Wednesday 18 March to determine a campaign of industrial action”.

In a second separate motion that was carried unanimously the meeting resolved that:

“If negotiations resume as demanded, a meeting of members should be called for March 25 to consider whether satisfactory progress in relation to our claim has been made and to consider any appropriate action.”

The following motion supporting the NTEU industrial campaign at Victoria University also received unanimous endorsement:

“The University of Melbourne Branch of the NTEU sends a strong message of support and solidarity to the NTEU members at Victoria University who are collectively opposing illogical and unwarranted mass sackings, attack on work loads and working condition on their campus. The University of Melbourne Branch whole heartedly endorses the industrial campaign launched by the members at VU. The University of Melbourne branch encourages its own members to find ways to provide assistance and encouragement to the members at VU if actions are called.

The threatened mass sackings at VU are totally ill considered and without basis. Along with other unions and communities we condemn the VU management especially the Vice Chancellor of VU.”