AdvocateJournal of the National Tertiary Education Union

Volume 14, Number 2, July 2007 ISSN 1321–8476 Representing Employees in Higher Education, TAFE, Adult Education, RACGP, Research Institutes and University Companies The ‘Melbourne Costello’s Model’ ‘Education’  Wider implications for the sector Budget  Arguments for and against  We analyse the contents  Arts Faculty hardest hit

RQF begins  Can a sow’s ear be a Free Tax Guide inside silk purse?

Bargaining internationally  Casuals Conferences  Science and Humanities members meet MPs ADVERTISEMENT

See why more members come to us for a Home Loan

Union members, receive a “member-only” discount with So whether you need a new loan, or you’re looking to Members Equity Bank – which means you could save switch, give us a call – a mobile lender will visit you at home thousands over the life of your loan. or at work, to discuss your loan and start your application. A full featured home loan just for members! ✓ No application fee CALL 1300 654 997 or apply online at membersequitybank.com.au ✓ No ongoing monthly fees ✓ No fees to split, fix or top up your loan ✓ Borrow up to 95% ✓ Free redraw

Fees and charges apply. Terms and conditions are available on request. Applications are subject to credit approval. Members Equity Bank Pty Ltd ABN 56 070 887 679 AFS Licence: 229500. AdvocateJOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL TERTIARY EDUCATION UNION

VOLUME 14, NUMBER 2, JULY 2007 REGULAR FEATURES FROM THE OFFICERS On the cover: 2 Research sustainability missing from RQF focus Carolyn Allport, National President Melbourne’s Federation 3 WorkChoices still WorkChoices Square Grahame McCulloch, General Secretary PHOTO: Adam Booth

4 The ILO and domestic politics SPECIAL FEATURES Ted Murphy, National Assistant Secretary HIGHER EDUCATION COVER STORY UPDATE What does the University of Melbourne’s announcement of a US-style two tier 5 Genuine choice denied in AWAs at Swinburne higher education structure mean for its staff and the rest of the sector. CQU ignores umpire’s decision 8 Melbourne Model has wider implications for the sector Staff protection sought in closure of UNSW Asia campus Andrew Nette 6 ALP adopts NTEU’s education amendments 9 ‘Dreamlarge’ a nightmare for Melbourne Arts Faculty UB leads the way on general staff reclassification Associate Professor David Phillips 10 Expanding the student experience to other disciplines, 7 Collective action key to success for NCELTR members the wider community and the world… UNE redundancies overturned Professor Loane Skene Carbon neutral call at UWS 11 Melbourne Model: The jury is still out COLUMNS Ted Clark 26 ePhones converge FUNDING News from the Net, by Patrick Wright Higher education received a pleasantly surprising emphasis in the last Federal 27 Rough play ahead Budget, but what did it really contain? Lowering the Boom, by Ian Lowe 12 Unpacking the ‘Education’ Budget 28 Busy times in NZ higher education Emma Cull and Paul Kniest Letter from Aotearoa New Zealand, by Nigel Haworth, AUS 14 Higher Education Endowment Fund (HEEF) 29 Is Howard a born-again believer in higher education? 15 Changes to domestic undergraduate full fee places Regional Focus, by Jenny Austin INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS INDIGENOUS NEWS 16 Collective bargaining in higher education – a world view 30 National Indigenous Forum 2007 Ken McAlpine 30 New Indigenous Officer: Adam Frogley 20 NTEU campaign against proposed school closure at QUT YOUR UNION Associate Professor Gavin Kendall 31 Casuals Conferences: Building momentum for positive 21 Geneva hearings put spotlight on HEWRRs change Ken McAlpine 32 Book voucher winners RESEARCH 33 SA casuals conferences a success RQF is about to become a reality for Australian universities. 34 Recent human rights actions by NTEU 17 Let the RQF games begin 35 New Branch Organisers in Queensland Paul Kniest 19 RQF: Can a sow’s ear be a silk purse? 36 Contacting your union Associate Professor Greg McCarthy Free Tax Guide EVENTS with this issue! Advocate is published by National Tertiary Education Union. PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205 ph: 03 9254 1910 fax: 03 9254 1915 22 Science meets Parliament ISSN 1321-8476 ABN 38 579 396 344 All text & images © NTEU 2007, unless otherwise stated Dr Robin Robertson and Dr Simon Marsland Publisher: Grahame McCulloch Editor: Carolyn Allport Production: Paul Clifton Editorial Assistance: Anastasia Kotaidis 24 Humanities on the Hill Feedback and advertising: [email protected] Peter Pinnington and Associate Professor Gavin Kendall See p.36 for National Executive, National Office staff and Division contact details. FROM THE OFFICERS CAROLYN ALLPORT, NATIONAL PRESIDENT Research sustainability missing from RQF focus

ne of the key issues for universities across the world over the last decade has been how to assure the quality of research. O Many governments in Europe and indeed in our own Asia-Pacific region have been developing new tools to assess research quality, and most use some form of research assessment exercise.

Australia has also been caught up in this trend with Research Quality • Pay rates and other conditions for university researchers that are Framework (RQF) due to begin in 2008. Some would argue that it is not competitive with industry, including provisions such as super- useful because the assessment exercise will provide a rating system annuation and the ability to access leave entitlements without it for research quality and for research impact. While discussions have necessarily coming out of the grant budget. been ongoing for over a year, concerns still remain among our institu- • The need for improved research infrastructure, especially in relation tions and researchers. Preparations for the RQF have occupied large to building and refurbishing high capital costs of specialist labs. amounts of universities’ time and money. Complicating this further, • The problem of upholding freedom of inquiry and undertaking not surprisingly, there are significant differences between the Gov- curiosity driven research in an environment increasingly governed ernment and Labor about whether we have the right model. by project based research funding. While there is no doubt the RQF is an important issue, all the atten- • The lack of income support measures available to Higher Degree tion focused on it threatens to obscure the wider issue of how we sus- Research students, including the need for a greater number of tain our broader research effort given that Australia is not well placed scholarships to be made available. in the international research market. In the context of discussions • The lack of measures, such as joint international exchanges, and within the Bologna Framework in Europe, considerable attention has incentives to keep ‘high flyers’ in Australian universities. been paid to improving the ‘attractiveness’ of a research career in uni- These issues are compounded by the demographic crisis facing all versities, research institutes and other higher education institutions. Australian universities. In Professor Hugo’s view the cause of the cur- Urgent steps are needed to create an environment where pursuing rent crisis is a result of the rapid increase in university academic staff a dedicated research career at an Australian university is a more attrac- in the 1960s and 1970s which led to an age cohort of young academic tive proposition than is currently the case. If we are unable to improve staff that are now quickly approaching retirement age. An indication our ‘attractiveness’ to researchers, then we will find it difficult to sustain of the scale of the problem is highlighted by some recent statistics. our research and innovation effort, particularly given the aging of the The proportion of all lecturers and tutors under 30 is 33.8%, compared academic workforce. Research by Professor Graeme Hugo has shown to 53.8% for the entire workforce, and 49.3% for all professionals. The that the academic workforce in Australia is older than almost any other proportion of lecturers and tutors over 55 is 19% compared to 11.5% group of workers, and that universities will have significant difficulties for the entire workforce, and 11.1% for all professionals. in recruiting the number of new staff required to replace the large pro- Based on this data Hugo estimates ‘that universities are likely to lose portion of academics that are likely to retire in the next decade.1 between a fifth and a third of their staff in the next decade.’2 Clearly Without adequate career paths for university researchers, this there are considerable challenges here for us. recruitment task will become even more difficult and Australia’s How do these issues link to our discussions of the RQF? In its cur- innovation may suffer through a lower basic research effort and a rent form the RQF privileges accountability over autonomy, a culture restricted ability to produce graduates capable of working in applied, of compliance over a culture of innovation, and bureaucratic meth- experimental and strategic research endeavours. odology over academic consensus. While there is a general accept- NTEU has undertaken wide consultations within the research com- ance amongst staff of the principle of research assessment, the Union munity about how to improve the attractiveness of a research career. remains concerned about the efficacy of the model, notably for Aus- Here are some of their comments about factors that work to inhibit tralian researchers who will be most affected by its changes. successful promotion of research careers: The RQF is a static policy instrument. It has captured our attention, • Ongoing job insecurity, including the employment of more and has increasingly occupied the time of both institutional leaders researchers on fixed term contracts, resulting from the competi- and staff at almost all institutions. In this context the RQF has encour- tive nature of much Government and industry research funding. aged institutions to focus on those at the top – those who it is • Growing levels of casualisation that particularly impact on post- expected would rate a 5 in the quality assessment. However, if we are graduate students, many of whom might be considering embarking to also have an eye to the sustainability of our research effort we on a research career. According to figures supplied by DEST, more should remember that a large component of our research perform- than 50% of the employment growth within universities has been ance comes from postgraduate research students whose perform- on a casual basis, the majority of casual academics are employed to ance is not included in the RQF. And it is their future that is deserving deliver teaching whether by lectures, tutorials or other means. of greater attention than is currently the case. 1. Hugo, G. Academia’s own demographic time-bomb, Australian Universities Review, Vol 48, No 1, 2005. 2. Ibid, p20

 NTEU ADVOCATE FROM THE OFFICERS GRAHAME Mcculloch, general secretary

WorkChoices still WorkChoices

he Howard Government is currently stuck in the opinion poll doldrums for many reasons, but there is little doubt that Tthe harshness of the 2006 WorkChoices industrial relations system has contributed to the electoral backlash. The Govern- ment’s late May announcement of the new Fairness Test was a direct political response to this community disenchantment. No choices in original WorkChoices These changes cut many basic entitlements and working condi- It is worth remembering the central effects of the original 2006 Work- tions and gave employers almost unfettered power. WorkChoices Choices scheme on (then) current employees and new employees: really should have been called Employer Choices or No Choices at All. • For new employees the Federal and most of the State Award sys- tems were effectively dismantled, with new employees having no No fairness in the Fairness Test right to be covered by an Award. The old Award-based no disad- vantage test was abolished and replaced by only five minimum The ‘Fairness Test’ will apply to Collective Agreements and AWAs made standards – a minimum hourly rate of pay set by the Fair Pay Com- after May 2007, provided the employee is paid less than $75,000 and mission, 10 days sick leave/carer’s leave, 4 weeks annual leave, 52 works in an industry or occupation usually regulated by an Award. weeks unpaid parental leave, and a 38 hour week (which can be Where the proposed Collective Agreement or AWA excludes or averaged over a year). The Office of the Employment Advocate changes one of the ‘protected Award conditions’, it must provide ‘fair (OEA) assessed Agreements against the no disadvantage test, but compensation’ in lieu of the relevant condition. A renamed OEA (the without hearings, submissions or comments from interested par- Workplace Authority) will be given responsibility for administering ties and without a requirement to provide formal advice. the new test, without a requirement for hearings, submissions or writ- • Employers could require new employees to sign Australian ten determinations. There is no right of appeal. Workplace Agreements (AWAs) with conditions inferior to those While the new test will breathe some limited new life into the now set by Collective Agreements and/or remaining Award standards. comatose Award system, it has multiple flaws within its own terms. • Employees already covered by Awards at the commencement of More than 2.5 million workers will be excluded from the test, prin- 2006 WorkChoices, were said to have additional ‘protected Award cipally workers earning more than $75,000 per annum, those not conditions’ against which an AWA needed to be assessed (mon- covered by an Award, or those who signed an AWA between March etary allowances, overtime and penalty/shift loadings). However, 2006 and May 2007. While the principal ‘protected Award standards’ an employer offering an AWA merely had to specify in writing that are overtime, allowances and penalty/shift loadings, important old so-called ‘protected Award conditions’ would not apply in order to Award standards such as redundancy pay/notice and paid maternity avoid the additional ‘protected Award condition’ test. Moreover, leave are not part of the test. ‘Fair compensation’ need not be pro- protected conditions did not include redundancy notice, retrench- vided in monetary terms. ment pay, or paid maternity leave. Despite the PM’s spin, the new Fairness Test is unlikely to help the • Compulsory arbitration of industrial disputes by the Australian Government because the announced changes barely touch the overall Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) was abolished, other than substance and scope of WorkChoices, including the primacy of AWAs disputes arising under Collective Agreements (where such Agree- over Collective Agreements, the abolition of compulsory arbitration ments have arbitration provisions). of Award and Agreement standards, strict limits on industrial action, • The AIRC played no role in setting minimum wages – instead this limits on unfair dismissal protection and reduced union rights. role now falls to a so-called Australian Fair Pay Commission. • Unfair dismissal rights did not apply to employees in workplaces Sharp contrast with Labor policy of less than 100 employees, and larger employers could avoid unfair dismissal claims by relying on so-called ‘operational rea- The Labor Party’s new industrial relations policy was announced in sons’. Employers were able to re-hire workers on inferior AWA con- late April 2007 and guarantees ten national minimum employment ditions. standards, the right to Collective Bargaining by majority employee • Claims for trade union training and unfair dismissal protection decision, the abolition of AWAs, the resuscitation of an Award safety- were prohibited in Collective Agreements, and union negotiators net for collective bargaining, and improved unfair dismissal rights. could be fined for pursuing such matters. An employer was able to While the policy has disappointing aspects, notably limits on pro- unilaterally terminate a Collective Agreement ninety days after its tected industrial action, it is still a stark contrast with the revised nominal expiry date, and there were strict limitations on industrial WorkChoices regime. The next issue of the Advocate will review a action during bargaining periods for Collective Agreements. possible Labor industrial relations future.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au  FROM THE OFFICERS ted murphy, national assistant secretary

The ILO and domestic politics

he International Labour Organisation (ILO) has an annual conference attended by voting delegates from governments, T employer organisations, and peak union councils from member countries. The 2007 conference featured prominently in the Australian press because of claims by the Minister of Workplace Relations and some employer representatives that the ACTU President, Sharan Burrow, was using it to ‘smear Australia’.

The alleged smear job was undertaken by proxy as Burrow wasn’t countries. Unless repressive regimes cease to exist or all developed at the Conference. I was one of two ACTU representatives in attend- country governments comply with the ILO conventions they have ance. This generated a media statement from Ian Argall, the Executive ratified, it is likely that each conference will have one or more devel- Director of the Australian Higher Education Industrial Association, oped countries on the agenda alongside cases involving repressive that I was adversely affecting the ability of Australian universities to regimes. recruit academics from other countries. Apparently the ILO confer- ence is a major and well publicised event for overseas universities The ‘smear’ and parochialism and their staff. There are other contenders for an award for hyperbole about Describing the ACTU case as smearing Australia ignores the distinc- events at the Conference. The claim that Burrow was smearing Aus- tion between attacking one’s country and criticising the actions of tralia was treated as an important news story by the Murdoch press. a particular government. The implication of this description is that It was not analysed either as a minor pre-election skirmish – part of all non-government organisations that make claims and document the Government’s campaign about union behaviour and by impli- cases of non-compliance by an Australian government with interna- cation the risks of electing the ALP – or in the context of the ILO’s tional conventions on labour standards, human rights, the treatment mechanism for resolving disputes. of refugees, or the environment, are smearing their country. Some papers also took seriously the claim that the ACTU was so It is a line of reasoning predicated on the notion that only other determined to have its complaint heard that it pressed for its inclu- countries’ governments can make such claims, and that one’s own sion on the ILO conference agenda at the expense of complaints government should be the sole domestic agency for judging its own against the Government of Colombia, where union leaders have behaviour in terms of compliance with international conventions. been assassinated. Equally objectionable is the parochial notion that such disputes should be resolved within Australia, that the international dispute The ILO Process resolution mechanisms that the ILO and other international insti- tutions have should not be used at all. Unfortunately, even the At an ILO conference, allegations of non-compliance with conven- Shadow Minister for Workplace Relations appeared to endorse this tions are dealt with by the Committee on the Application of Stand- view in a media interview. ards, which reports to a plenary session of the Conference. The The ACTU’s case is that the Howard Government, by encouraging Committee is constituted on a tripartite basis and it can be difficult employers to use AWAs, by legislating that AWAs displace collec- reaching agreement on which cases it will deal with at the annual ILO tive agreements, that the employment of new staff may be made Conference. Unfortunately, differences between the employer group conditional on their acceptance of AWAs, that the Minister may by and the union group meant it took some days to finalise the list of regulation limit the scope of collective bargaining by declaring cer- cases for consideration. tain employment matters to be prohibited items for bargaining, is The employer group stated that it opposed the inclusion of not complying with Article 4 of Convention 98. Colombia on the basis that there was an existing ILO strategy for Article 4 states that, where necessary, governments will take improving the situation in that country and that there had been measures appropriate to national conditions to promote negotia- some improvement over the last year. The employers did not waiver tion between employers and workers organisations with a view to from this position. Had there been a possibility of listing Colombia the regulation of employment conditions by means of collective on the agenda by leaving the ACTU’s case off, it would have been agreements. negotiated by the union group. Assassination and torture of union There are arguments to be had about the proper interpretation of leaders outweigh the problems of WorkChoices. ‘where necessary’ and ‘appropriate to national conditions’. However, The coverage in some papers included claims that the inclusion to mount a case that the Howard Government is not promoting col- of Australia on the list put our country on the same footing as the lective bargaining between employers and unions is hardly a smear most repressive regimes in the world. The Committee on the Appli- against the Government, let alone the country. cation of Standards deals with a mix of cases from different types of See also ‘Geneva hearings put spotlight on HEWRRs’, p.21

 NTEU ADVOCATE UPDATE

VICTORIA NEW SOUTH WALES ‘Genuine choice’ denied in AWAs at Staff protection Swinburne sought after

TEU is campaigning against management attempts to force staff on to Aus- closure of UNSW N tralian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) at Swinburne University.

In late 2006, NTEU raised concerns regard- Although there have been further minor Asia campus ing policies which purported to require all concessions from management, the dis- casual and sessional staff to sign AWAs and pute is now before the Australian Industrial TEU is seeking to protect the all staff on loadings, and other arrange- Relations Commission and negotiations are N job security and conditions ments, to also sign AWAs. Swinburne continuing. Management has continued to of University of New South Wales agreed to remove the requirement for argue it will choose when and which staff (UNSW) staff against any adverse casual staff, but has refused to back down will be on AWAs and what they will include, fall out from the decision to close on their novel view of what ‘Genuine Choice which flies in the face of the Federal Govern- UNSW’s Asia campus in Singapore. in Agreement Making’ means for other cat- ment’s proposition that the HEWRRs deliv- egories of staff. ered choice in agreement making for staff. Ms Chris Game, NSW NTEU State Secre- In April, as part of the campaign, the Requiring current or prospective staff to tary, said ‘A significant number of staff at Union conducted very well attended all- sign AWAs is a very serious matter. AWAs UNSW Asia have... forfeit[ed] positions staff meetings across all the Swinburne remove your capacity to participate in col- at the Sydney campus in order to work University campuses. These meetings sent lective bargaining. If you are led to believe in Singapore. These people should not a clear message to management that staff you are required to sign an AWA you should have to pay the price of their jobs and would not accept such attacks on their contact your NTEU Branch for advice. careers because of risky ventures that rights at work. Josh Cullinan, National Industrial Officer the University wishes to undertake.’ ‘The University’s management must make it a priority to ensure these people are re-employed or re-absorbed back QUEENSLAND into the UNSW community in Australia. As these staff were employed under con- CQU ignores umpire’s decision tracts with a private Singaporean provider, NTEU also calls on the Vice-Chancellor to confirm that any redundancy payments uring May, Central Queensland University (CQU) announced that it was will be in line with the conditions these D cutting 200 fixed term general staff positions as they expire over the staff enjoyed under the provisions of the coming months. There has been no proper consultation about the Universi- UNSW Collective Agreement.’ ty’s intentions, which would cut the general staff workforce by 27%. Whilst NTEU acknowledges manage- ment has assured Singapore campus staff The announcements were made despite In response, Margaret Lee, NTEU Queens- it will attempt to offer as many positions the terms of the Union’s Collective Agree- land Division Secretary told staff: as possible back in Australia, the closure ment with CQU, which commits to consul- ‘We have contacted Deputy Vice-Chan- of the campus comes hot on the heels of tation in a meaningful way before making cellor Delves of CQU (who testified in the the ‘slash and burn’ redundancy program any decision to significantly reduce the case). It was our hope that the recommen- where in excess of 300 general staff have size of the workforce. dation of the neutral umpire would help to already lost jobs. NTEU advised CQU it was in breach of sway their position. I’m saddened to report The Union has also sought assurances its Agreement, and initiated action in the that this seems not to be the case. I find that UNSW’s financial loss will not be Industrial Relations Commission, which their decision shocking. In my experience, it used as a pretext for further job losses or found CQU had breached its Agreement. is rare for an employer of this size to thumb downgrading of resources in Sydney. It recommended the University extend the its nose at the independent umpire.’ Chris Game said ‘NTEU members at employment of a number of fixed term At the time of writing, NTEU was plan- UNSW had expressed their concerns staff and properly consult the Union. ning to prosecute the University in the regarding the risks involved in setting up The University has refused to comply Federal Court for its breach of the Agree- the Singapore campus on a number of with the Commission’s recommendation. ment. occasions.’

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au  UPDATE

NATIONAL VICTORIA ALP adopts NTEU’s education amendments UB leads the way TEU has succeeded in having a number of amendments incorporated in some on general staff Nform into the platform of the Australian Labor Party at its recent national conference in Sydney. The most significant NTEU amendment agreed to by the conference commits a future Labor Government to repeal the current Higher Edu- reclassification cation Support Act 2003 and replace it with separate pieces of legislation for uni- versity and non-university higher education providers. TEU’s University of Ballarat (UB) A delegation of NTEU staff and office bearers category of institution, higher education NBranch is running a campaign attended the 44th conference of the ALP in providers and give them limited access to for the proper classification of all Sydney in late April as observers. Commonwealth subsidies. general staff at the University. NTEU liaised closely with Labor’s shadow Secondly, it sets out a number of qual- spokesperson for Science and Innovation, ity assurance, auditing, accountability and Not only are the rates of pay for all staff Senator Kim Carr, and for Education, Stephen other conditions, which while suitable for among the lowest in the country, the Smith. The final amendment states: a purchaser provider relationship between classification profile is skewed towards Labor recognises that universities and pri- government and non-self accrediting higher the lower end of the classification ladder. vate higher education providers fulfill dif- education institutions, are quite inappropriate DEST statistics show that UB has a much ferent roles. Labor will ensure the legislative for autonomous self accrediting universities. higher proportion of general staff at framework reflects this through separate NTEU strongly believes that these changes HEW3 or below than other Victorian Uni- pieces of legislation. Labor believes this will have threatened the identity of our univer- versities and a much lower proportion of enhance the domestic and international sities and, with other policy settings being general staff at HEW6 or above. competitiveness and reputation of Austral- pursued by the Coalition, risk reducing many Meetings of staff discussed the issue ia’s higher education sector. universities to the status of cost effective during May, chaired by General Staff Labor’s White Paper on higher education, degree mills competing for students and Vice-President Deb Lord. Some of the released last year, committed Labor to sepa- limited subsidies. This has significant implica- feedback from staff included: rate legislative arrangements for university tions for their reputation and competitiveness ‘My school told me don’t even bother and non-university higher education provid- in the international higher education market. going for a reclassification, the school ers. NTEU has been keen to cement Labor’s can’t afford it…’ commitment to this policy. Future legislation ‘The whole process – from asking for the committee to hear my reclas- Current legislative problems NTEU believes there is an urgent need for sification case to lodging the appeal new legislative architecture to cover univer- – took over two years. And after all that, NTEU has been concerned for some time sities as opposed to other higher education despite my school supporting my case, and an initial unanimous approval by about the impact of legislative changes providers. While the details of any future leg- the committee, I wasn’t successful and I introduced as part of the Coalition’s ‘Backing islative arrangements will need to be worked still don’t know why.’ Australia’s Future’ package in late 2003. The out with a potential Labor Government, ‘I often talk to staff who do my job at previous Higher Education Funding Act 1988 NTEU believes that a ‘university act’ should other institutions. We all do similar work dealt almost exclusively with self-accrediting be open to all universities and like institu- and have similar levels of responsibil- institutions. The exceptions were Avondale tions, whether ‘public’, ‘not-for-profit’ or ‘pri- ity, but they are all one – or even two College and two institutions, Christian Her- vate’. For this purpose a ‘like institution’ will – HEW levels higher than me.’ itage College and Tabor College, added in be an autonomous higher education institu- ‘I think I should be at a higher level but 2002 for the purpose of receiving the Post- tion established by its own statute, with the it’s hard to tell – I’ve been here for years graduate Enrolment Loan Scheme. capacity to accredit its own courses at degree but I’ve never had a PD, so how can I There are two key problems with the cur- and postgraduate level. possibly be correctly classified?!’ rent Higher Education Support Act 2003. Firstly, We will also be ensuring that any new legis- NTEU has written to management it removed the distinction between self- lation includes the incorporation of safeguards demanding that all staff have their classi- accrediting universities and non-university to the position of universities. This includes fications reviewed on the basis of agreed higher education providers by defining the protection for academic freedom and the rec- Position Descriptions. If a satisfactory relationship between the Commonwealth ognition that a university is an independent outcome is not forthcoming, the Union and all higher education providers along the and autonomous institution that has its own will take the matter to the Industrial Rela- lines of a financial purchaser provider model. objects established by statute and its own tions Commission or the courts. As part of this, the Act enables the Federal distinct history and mission. Ken McAlpine, Senior Industrial Officer Education Minister to directly approve a new Andrew Nette, Policy & Research Coordinator

 NTEU ADVOCATE UPDATE

NEW SOUTH WALES NEW SOUTH WALES Collective action key to success as NCELTR UNE redundancies members win contract improvements overturned after

collective approach to contract negotiations by NTEU members in the NTEU campaign A National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research (NCELTR) at Macquarie University has led to significant changes to the wording of their con- tracts, and resulted in a successful and fair outcome for staff. TEU NSW Division has had a N significant win with the over- Clauses for concern consultation and discussion of the issues turning of two redundancies at the under question. University of New England (UNE). The incident began when NCELTR teach- Subsequently, NTEU members held sev- ers, none of whom are continuing employ- eral rounds of meetings. In the first round, a Two staff members, made redundant ees, received new offers of employment letter informing HR of the general issues of during a review of the Mathematics in January. Several clauses on these letters concern was drafted and signed by all staff. Department, lodged reviews under concerned teachers, as they appeared to In the second, proposed changes to the con- the Redundancy Review procedures ask them to agree to work for any number tract wording were put together to outline in the 2003 UNE Enterprise Agree- of hours, at any place, and at any time. Also, the position of staff for negotiations with ment. The Review Panels, issuing teachers were given only a few days to con- HR. Many new members joined our Union their decision well after the termina- sider and sign the contract. through involvement in this process. tion date of one of the staff members, NTEU delegates then discussed the issues concluded decisively that both redun- with their colleagues and organised for all Negotiating with strength dancies were not genuine and should staff to sign a group letter to HR, requesting an be retracted. extension of time to consider the contracts. With the full support of all staff concerned, After the campaign efforts of NTEU’s NTEU officials were then able to negotiate NSW Division, both in applying politi- United and firm front from a position of Union strength, to achieve cal pressure and in pursuing dispute the changes desired. notifications in the Commission, the HR sent a representative to an NCELTR staff At the end of this constructive process, Vice-Chancellor decided on 17 April meeting to try to convince teachers to sign staff, management and HR were satisfied with to rescind both redundancies, stating the contracts. However, Union members a new form of wording on the contracts. ‘there are issues concerning complete were well organised prior to the meet- This satisfactory outcome was achieved compliance with the Enterprise Agree- ing, and an NTEU organiser also attended. because of the concerted front put up by ment that are of concern.’ Numerous staff members spoke of their NCELTR staff in consultation with the NTEU. The two staff members have thus deep concern over signing such contracts, This demonstrates once again, that collective been reinstated to their original posi- and put forward strong arguments in favour action is the best way to protect and improve tions. of making changes. Faced with a united and workers’ rights. Sarah Roberts, National Industrial Officer firm front, HR agreed to allow extra time for NTEU Macquarie University Branch

NEW SOUTH WALES Genevieve Kelly, NTEU UWS Branch Presi- The University’s regional community is dent, said ‘Global warming is now scien- greatly affected by the health impacts of Carbon neutral call tifically recognised as being an immediate pollution, so UWS can lead in this area by threat to the ongoing survival of life on demonstrating a sustainable, corporate earth and there is a need for all industry, responsibility model for other industries. at UWS organisations and people to take collective ‘The Union wants to work cooperatively action and responsibility now to mitigate with the UWS management in this initia- TEU’s University of Western and prevent the adverse impacts of climate tive,’ Ms Kelly said, ‘and we are seeking the N Sydney (UWS) Branch has called change on our planet. As a signatory to the immediate establishment of a working on management to demonstrate com- Talloires Declaration, an international com- party, comprising NTEU members, stu- munity leadership on environmental mitment to environmental sustainability in dents and management to develop a range and sustainability issues by taking higher education, UWS is very well placed of strategies and milestones to progress a steps to become carbon neutral. to demonstrate such leadership.‘ carbon neutral UWS.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au  HIGHER EDUCATION ‘Melbourne Model’ has wider implications for the sector

he University of Melbourne’s announcement that it will spend approximately $185 million in a radical overhaul designed T to shift it towards the type of two tier higher education structure favoured in the US, will have wider impact throughout the sector, reports NTEU Policy & Research Coordinator, Andrew Nette.

Under the changes, dubbed the ‘Melbourne Model’ by Vice-Chancel- paper in May, stated that it planned to double its domestic full fee lor Glyn Davis, the University will abolish 96 undergraduate degree students, while cutting 3,000 HECS places over the next 20 years. programs over the next four years and replace them with six broad According to The Age, while the University expects a short term rise based offerings: arts, biomedicine, commerce, environment, music in HECS places they are planning for a corresponding jump in full fee and sciences. These will lead to a second tier of professional courses, places from 2011, including projections that approximately half of mostly at a Masters level, in law, medicine, architecture, nursing, edu- the University’s law and dentistry students and one in three medicine cation and dentistry, with others to follows. students will be full fee paying. In addition to US influence, the Melbourne Model also has simi- Whatever the exact figures are, it appears inevitable that under larities to the 45-country European plan signed in Bologna in 1999, the proposed changes more students will pay full fees in areas like which will see universities introduce a common structure of three- law and medicine, at a cost of $80,000 and $215,000 respectively on year undergraduate degrees plus two years of postgraduate study 2007 figures. Indeed, the University’s management has been very from 2010. upfront about the fact that students who commence their general While there appears to be considerable agreement about the ped- degree at the University on a publicly subsidised HECS place could agogical and other benefits of the change this is not universal (as the find themselves having to complete their professional course on a full accompanying articles by Skene and Philips makes clear). fee paying basis. Many agree that the changes will help ensure professional courses The University has been keen to stress that accompanying the do not become too narrow and specialised, and the argument that changes will be a generous $100 million scholarship system, includ- most school leavers are too young to choose a university degree and ing free degrees for the best performing students at Victorian a career and that they are better off starting with a broad degree. schools, reserving HECS places for students from disadvantaged Among the concerns expressed about the proposal and work- backgrounds. load intensification is that the restructure could result in significant While education considerations clearly play a major role in the job losses, and the impact it will have on the institution’s discipline changes being pursued as part of the Melbourne Model, the institu- breadth, with criticisms raised about the removal of gender studies as tion will no doubt welcome the prospect of the extra full fee income an undergraduate major and the removal of social theory, American, it could generate and the added independence from Commonwealth European and development studies altogether from the institution’s policy dictates this would give the institution. curriculum. There have also been concerns raised that some students Underpinning the Melbourne Model is the acceptance that high will be unable to complete their majors or even their degrees due to student fees and reduced Commonwealth contributions to univer- the unexpected discontinuation of subjects. sities are here to stay. Philanthropy, while a potentially important In terms of the public debate around the Model, the most signifi- part of the institution’s funding, is by itself no solution in the short cant issue has been the potential financial implications for students to medium term. As Glyn Davis told The Australian newspaper April: and the University that arise from the likelihood that more students ‘We operate on the assumption that there won’t be any major reversal will have to pay up front full fees to study at the institution. The Uni- in Commonwealth funding to universities and that the federal gov- versity’s management have stated that they are aiming for an enrol- ernment’s proportion of funding will only continue to fall’. Also driv- ment ratio of two-thirds publicly supported (HECS) students to one ing it is the market power of the University of Melbourne to push the third full fee payers, with professional courses such as nursing, teach- changes through and sustain adequate student load, both Common- ing, social work and agriculture to be comprised a hundred per cent wealth subsidised and full fee paying. of publicly subsidised students. While we are going to have to wait for the full impacts of the Mel- Modelling conducted by the University, obtained by The Age news- bourne Model on the sector to be seen, it has already caused signifi-

 NTEU ADVOCATE HIGHER EDUCATION ‘Dreamlarge’ a nightmare for the Arts Faculty

Associate Professor David Phillips, lecturing duties, this sort of attention will become impossible. Add Department of History, to this the fact that the Faculty will be cutting drastically the casual University of Melbourne budget, for payment of tutors, and it seems highly likely that tuto- rials as we have known them (with a maximum of 15 students in History), in which students critically analyse issues and materials in small-group discussion, will disappear. A point of pride in the old History Department, praised by many cohorts of students, was its array of specific courses on important elbourne University is advertising its new Mel- societies and conflicts – the French Revolution, industrialising M bourne Model under the inane slogan ‘dreamlarge’. Britain, Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, apartheid-era South Africa, The entire Australian university community should be the Holocaust and other genocides, and many others – offering, worried about what is involved; but Melbourne’s Arts Fac- through primary materials, a good grasp of both national socie- ulty has greatest cause for concern. ties and problems. Already, some of these have been axed from the offerings for 2008 under the ‘Melbourne Model’, and others Three points highlight this concern: are likely to go, in favour of large, bland survey courses designed • Vice-Chancellor Glyn Davis has admitted, in media interviews, to accommodate hundreds of students. Students will still receive that the scheme’s underlying principle is a substantial transfer transcripts to say that they have passed courses – but the courses of resources from undergraduate to postgraduate and research will be dumbed down and their currency debased. areas (much better remunerated by Canberra). The ‘Melbourne Model’ will probably work well for the profes- • The Dean of Arts recently outlined a plan to cut academic staff sional faculties – law, medicine, commerce, engineering – for (tenured and untenured) by 20% over the next three years. which it is really designed; they can charge full fees for Australian • The Associate Dean, Undergraduate Studies, said that the students, and may well reap a financial bonanza. But for those who normal Arts subject under the new model should comprise think that the essence of a true university is the intellectual qual- 250–450 students. ity of a non-utilitarian education in the humanities, the ‘Melbourne Taken together, these mean bad news for the quality of Arts Model’ is a distinct step backwards. undergraduate teaching. Melbourne has sustained a good reputa- This is not, of course, admitted in the avalanche of glitzy superfi- tion for quality Arts undergraduate courses. In my own more-than- cial brand-name advertising. But anyone who examines the adver- 30 years in the History Department, this owed much to the quality tisers’ propaganda carefully will note that the promises are all in of individual attention which the students received, in lectures and new professional degrees. Old-fashioned humanities – history, tutorials. When the students find themselves sitting in 250-plus philosophy, literature – do not belong in the Brave New World of lecture groups, catching occasional sight of a lecturer rotating the ‘dreamlarge’. cant ripples. It has won the backing of Federal Education Minister the Government has stated that universities will still be required to fill Julie Bishop. Labor leader Kevin Rudd and his education spokesper- allocated Commonwealth supported places before enrolling domes- son Stephen Smith have supported it (while at the same time pledg- tic full fee undergraduate students, once they have done this there ing Labor to abolish domestic undergraduate full fee places). The will be no limit on the number of full fee students that universities changes have also played a major role in kick starting a major debate can enrol. about specialisation which has already been reflected in terms of Given that domestic undergraduate full fee places were nowhere policy shifts. near the existing cap in 2005, it is unlikely that removing the cap alto- The recent Federal Budget included a number of changes that gether will result in any significant increase in the current numbers directly addressed some of the regulatory changes facing the full of domestic undergraduate full fee students, at the University of Mel- implementation of the Melbourne Model. This includes extending bourne and other institutions. student income support to students enrolled in approved course- Melbourne Model website c www.dreamlarge.edu.au work Masters Programs that lead to professional qualifications, allow- ing approved Master by coursework qualifications to be funded Further comment: under the Commonwealth Grant Scheme when they are an entry requirement to a profession or part of a restructure of existing course Expanding the student experience see p.10 requirements. Most controversially, they also saw the removal of the cap on The Melbourne Model: The jury is still out see p.11 domestic full fees places, previously set at 35% of student load. While background PHOTO: Adam Booth

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au  HIGHER EDUCATION

Expanding the student experience to other disciplines, the wider community and the world

Professor Loane Skene, Chair of the Board of Undergraduate Studies, University of Melbourne

ndergraduate students commencing at the University of Melbourne in 2008 will have a different experience from cur- U rent and former students and students in other universities. The six new undergraduate degrees – arts, biomedicine, commerce, environments, music and science will provide the best educational experience in Australia and enable students to work and live effectively anywhere in the world with the global opportunities of the twenty-first century.

In the new degrees, students will not only undertake It has been said that three years rigorous study in their major; they will students taking the new also take multi-disciplinary ‘breadth’ subjects. There degrees will have to will be students from other disciplines in their classes study longer and incur and they will experience other ‘ways of knowing’. higher costs. However, They may even choose a university breadth subject, the University has no like ‘Climate Change’, or ‘From Plato to Einstein’, that plans in the foresee- crosses many disciplines. They will develop skills such able future to reduce its image: www.dreamlarge.edu.au as problem-solving, communication, critical-think- intakes into Common- ing, awareness, teamwork and leadership. wealth-supported places (CSPs). In 2008, the University expects to Throughout their studies, students will be encouraged to engage enroll around 4,400 CSP students – 3,400 in new and existing under- with the local community in internships with business and commu- graduate courses; and around 1,000 in new Melbourne Model gradu- nity groups, applied research and volunteering. They will take a global ate programs previously taught at undergraduate level. A minimum perspective, with many students studying overseas for part of their of 50 per cent of the places in each of the new graduate professional degrees or working or volunteering with an international agency, to degrees will be CSPs. Some, such as nursing and teaching, will be develop a cross-cultural frame of reference. close to 100 per cent. Students completing the new degrees will be able to go directly Equity and access are high on the Melbourne Model agenda and into employment as the degrees will provide professional accredita- there will be more opportunities for disadvantaged students to enter tion, for example, for BCom students entering accounting and actuar- the university, for example, as graduates. There will be new programs ial practice. The students should be attractive to employers who have and scholarships designed to attract and support students from been telling us during our extensive consultation that they want stu- under-represented schools. Over $100 million will be offered in schol- dents with broad experience who are creative, adaptable and work arships and support over the next three years. well in teams. However, students who want to do further study will Current students will also benefit from the Melbourne Model. They be able to take graduate professional degrees like law and medicine, will, of course, be able to finish their courses and they will have access or research higher degrees including PhDs. Those students will be to exciting new subjects including the interdisciplinary subjects older and more focused. They will proceed as a cohort with more (though some current subjects may not be offered). They will have opportunities to forge friendships, develop networks and engage classes in the redesigned teaching spaces, and use the new student- with the big issues – through small group projects, mentoring and centred services for subject and career advice and help with support internships, and opportunities to get involved in community, envi- services. ronmental and humanitarian projects. At each stage of their studies, Perhaps the most remarkable element in the Melbourne Model is students will have qualifications comparable to those of European, its impact on staff. All are working frantically, often faced with uncer- Asian and North American universities that have a degree structure tainty, to meet tight deadlines. Yet they are engaged and excited by similar to the Melbourne Model. the challenge.

10 NTEU ADVOCATE HIGHER EDUCATION

The Melbourne Model: The jury is still out

Ted Clark, Department of Science and Mathematics Education, University of Melbourne

President, NTEU University of Melbourne Branch

he various impacts of the Melbourne Model are likely to fall unevenly across the University. There may be advantages T for some areas faculties, subjects, students and staff and very likely disadvantages for others.

The perceptions of the Model are also characterised by unevenness. On top of all this, the University has the problem that now all deci- These may not always be driven by the uneven impacts but more sions are contextualised by the implementation and transition to the by concerns about undue haste of the implementation stages, the Model. So in reality all issues to do with budgeting, course delivery appropriateness of subject design and removal, the general peda- and design, academic and professional staff workload, appointment gogy of the model, concerns about equity and elitism, concerns about of staff, student service provision, hours of work, Research Quality the University’s drift away from its responsibility as a public institu- Framework resourcing, even childcare provision, are easily framed as tion, and questions of fair and transparent processes in the treatment linked to or caused by the move or transition to the Model. of staff and students and decisions about subjects and governance It is now impossible to argue that there is a separation, for example, while managing change. Some aspects of the model are considered between cost cutting or staffing requirements from the introduction worthwhile and other aspects will be seen as completely disastrous. and implementation of the Melbourne Model. The unevenness and contradictory impacts are problems for the The Vice-Chancellor has stated that the Model is not an exercise in University itself in managing the transition, both in maintaining local cost cutting or staff reduction. Indicating that the University is aware morale and an adherence to the principles behind the changes. There that there will be increases in costs, it has provided transitional fund- is also the issue of managing the general apprehensiveness to the ing of $85 million for faculties and departments to apply for. On top changes, as reporting in the media has highlighted. of this the University sought and won student number increases and An additional problem for the University, that is of more general- a substantial shift in Commonwealth Support Places from the under- ised concern for staff, is workload intensification. It remains a core graduate to the graduate area. problem despite any argument that the Model is designed to stall The University and the Government are certainly aware that this is or reduce the massive build up of staff workloads and the tripling not going to be inexpensive, but to be successful as well as additional of student numbers. Workload intensification is an almost inevita- funding, the University needs to consult so as to gain the cooperation ble consequence of the Model and restructuring. Addressing the and commitment of staff. problem through short term staffing or sessional staff can contradict The way forward requires negotiation and agreement on fair proc- arguments the Model is based on an attempt to increase quality of esses and procedures for the transition. This will only be possible teaching, research and service by decreasing the pressure on staff. with the inclusion of the Union as the representative of staff. This is Refusing to address workload intensification is clearly not an especially important in relation to finding solutions to the problem option. But also seeking efficiencies based on cost reduction, such as of workload intensification. That any changes to workload or rede- through mandating much larger class sizes or increases in the ratio ployment are negotiated and open to review by the staff members of the students looked after by individual staff, is not going to be an affected either individually or in groups, and that there are provisions easy argument to put in relation to increasing quality. for fully supported professional development. At the same time as handling the issue of workloads and quality the It will also be important to find agreement on procedures and proc- University must also handle the largely cynical interpretation levelled esses for decisions about the elimination of subjects and the content by journalists, students, schools, parents, teachers and the general of new degrees and how they are to be taught. public that the main purpose of the Melbourne Model is to make the Staff need NTEU to hold the University to its assurance that the traditionally elitist perception of the University even more elitist by Melbourne Model is not a cost cutting or staff redundancy process seeking to emulate the elite private universities of the USA. The elit- and that supposed projected or unacknowledged new ‘budget con- ism claim is reinforced by the model’s aim to increase the time it takes straints’ do not result in the implementation of the Model in away that to complete specialist studies and the expectation that at least a pro- results in job shedding, either directly or via ‘stealth’ through the fail- portion of students will spend more time at full fee paying study. ure to continue positions or fill vacancies.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 11 FUNDING Unpacking the ‘education’ budget

PHOTO: MIIICHA

here is little doubt that most people involved in higher education were pleasantly surprised by the emphasis that edu- T cation, and higher education in particular, received in Treasurer Peter Costello’s 12th Federal Budget. Emma Cull and Paul Kniest analyse the contents.

The 2007-08 Federal Budget includes an additional $1.7 billion of Budget. A brief description of the important measures is also pro- expenditure over the next four years on universities, and this repre- vided. sents an average annual increase of about 7.5% in Commonwealth Increased Commonwealth Grant Scheme (CGS) funding of $560 funding (excluding HECS payments) over that period. million over four years represents an average annual increase of about Given the Coalition’s poor track record with respect to Common- 4% in CGS funding. The funding will be used to reduce the number of wealth investment in our universities (see Chart 1), it is worth asking funding clusters from the current twelve to seven (see Table 2). When what led to this ‘road to Damascus’ experience for a Government that taken together with the Government’s decision to remove the cap could only be described as ‘higher education sceptics’. on the number of domestic full fee undergraduate students universi- Minister Bishop claimed both before and curiously since the ties are allowed to enrol, these changes theoretically mean that some Budget, that universities needed to justify why they needed more undergraduate courses could become exclusively full fee degrees Commonwealth funding. Prior to the Budget she believed that uni- (See Domestic Undergraduate Full Fee Places, p.12). versities could save more than $400 million a year by being more effi- As Table 2 shows, the majority of clusters have the Commonwealth cient and since the Budget has pointed to the fact that the Group of Grant either maintained or increased, the only exception being for Eight universities made in excess of $470 million in operating surplus students enrolled in business related courses (Cluster A). For this in 2006 alone. cluster of students, the Commonwealth Grant will fall by $1,029 per There is no doubt that Labor’s decision to make education and its student, but to compensate, universities will be allowed to increase contribution to productivity and social prosperity a major election HECS fees by $1,215 per student, as a result of moving students in this issue did a great deal to focus the Government’s policy perspective cluster to highest HECS band. In other words, an economics student in this area. will now be charged the same HECS fees as a Law student. The CGS funding changes also involve a move away form the cur- What’s in the Budget for universities? rent one-year funding agreements to three-year agreements. Like previous funding agreements 7.5% of CGS funding will be conditional Table 1 provides an overview of the major new funding commit- on universities meeting (yet to be specified) governance, quality and ments that affect universities announced in this year’s Federal student enrolment and financial data reporting requirements.

12 NTEU ADVOCATE FUNDING

Table 1: New Policies and Funding Commitments 2007-08 Budget (8 May 2007) Major New Higher Expenditure Measures New Funding Commitments ($m) 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 4 YR TOTAL University Funding Increased CGS Funding 156.8 143.2 133.6 126.0 559.6 More responsive universities 51.3 56.5 57.1 58.2 223.1 Diversity and structural adjustment fund 16.5 16.7 16.8 16.8 66.8 Reducing red tape 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 Higher Education Endowment Fund (HEEF) 0.0 304.0 304.0 304.0 912.0 Sub Total Universities 225.2 520.7 511.5 505.0 1,762.4 Student Income Support Additional Learning Scholarships 11.6 22.3 26.6 30.9 91.4 Extending Rental Assistance to Austudy 13.2 24.0 24.5 25.1 86.8 Extending income support to Masters 5.5 11.2 12.5 14.1 43.3 Sub Total Student Income Support 30.3 57.5 63.6 70.1 221.5

TOTAL NEW HE COMMITMEMTS 255.5 578.2 575.1 575.1 1,983.9

TOTAL EDUCATION NEW COMMITMENTS 533.9 982.2 997.9 1,000.1 3,514.1 * Total funding for this program amounts to $209m over 4 yrs with the remaining $142m being sourced from reallocation of other funds including part of the LTPF and Collaboration and Structural Reform Fund

The structural adjustment and diversity fund which provides $209 So what does it all mean? million worth of funding over four years ($66.7 million of which is new), is targeted at small metropolitan and regional universities and While the levels of increased investment in higher education are wel- is reportedly to be used to assist these institutions to rationalise their come they need be put in context. Firstly, they are probably ‘too little course offerings or to develop partnerships with other education pro- too late’, given the cuts that universities have suffered under the first viders, including TAFE. ten years of the Howard Government. NTEU estimates that real cuts The Higher Education Endowment Fund (HEEF) will provide an esti- to Government funding of Australian universities between 1996 and mated $300 million per year in income, which will be earned from 2005 amount to somewhere between $4 billion and up to as much investing $5 billion of the Government’s accumulated surpluses in to as $7.7 billion if one allows for the increase in domestic student load a HEEF (see article on p.14 for more detail). over the period. In addition to the direct funding the Budget delivers to universities, continued overpage it also includes a number of limited improvements in student income support. These include measures to address ‘Indigenous disadvan- Higher Education Endowment Fund see p.16 tage’ in relation to participation in education, amounting to $218 mil- lion (covering all levels of education) over 4 years. A number of these Domestic undergraduate full fee places see p.17 measures relate directly to higher education, including: Table 2: Old and New CGS Funding Cluster Changes Measures that address eligibility • 2007 2008 criteria related to ABSTUDY. Commonwealth New Commonwealth 1,000 new Indigenous access Funding Cluster • Grant Cluster Grant scholarships each worth $4,000. Law $1,642 Other improved student income A $1,674 support measures, costing a total Accounting / Admin / Economics / Business $2,703 of $222 million over four years, Humanities $4,556 B $4,647 include: Mathematics / Statistics $5,381 Behavioural Science / Social Studies $7,233 • An additional 3,500 Common- C $8,217 wealth Scholarships for low Education $7,950 income students. Computing / Built Environment / Health $8,057 • Extending Rental Assistance to Clinical Psychology $7,233 AUSTUDY recipients. Allied Health $8,057 D $10,106 • Extending student income sup- Foreign Languages / Visual & Performing Arts $9,908 port to students enrolled in Nursing $10,953 E $11,280 approved Coursework Masters Engineering / Science / Surveying $13,411 F $14,363 programs that lead to profes- Dentistry / Medicine / Vet Science $16,810 sional qualifications. G $18,227 Agriculture $17,870

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 13 FUNDING Unpacking the ‘education’ The Higher Education budget continued Endowment Fund

In addition the Budget measures do little if anything to stop the quasi-privatisation of the Australian higher education sector (market) espite much initial media hype and confusion which is being achieved through policies that: D about the Government’s Higher Education Endow- • Make funding conditional on meeting Government policy require- ment Fund (HEEF), it is actually a $5 billion investment in ments. a perpetual fund that will be used to generate income. • Reduce levels of real public investment and force universities to It is this dividend, rather than the fund itself, that will be become increasingly reliant on private sources of income. invested in universities to support capital works and • Decrease the proportion of ‘discretionary’ Government funding research facilities. and increase ‘specific purpose’ and ‘competitive’ grants. • Remove the cap on the number of full fee paying domestic The Fund is expected to provide a dividend of undergraduate students, which may well be the first step approximately $900 million over 3 years, which toward the deregulation of HECS fees and the introduction will be distributed to individual universities by of student vouchers. the Minister, with advice from an independent • Introducing policies that encourage institutions to HEEF Board. The Board will consist of a chair and compete against each other for students and funding 6 members with higher education expertise, with (private and public) with the aim of restructuring the Secretary of DEST and the Chief Scientist acting the higher education sector to consist of a more in an ex-officio capacity. The Board of Guardians for the diverse range of institutions (including special- Future Fund will be responsible for investing the capital ist universities) each of which will survive by component of the HEEF to maximise returns. It is intended exploiting their competitive advantage. that capital investment will be made to the HEEF from future budget surpluses to grow the Fund. There are however, a large number of unanswered questions about how the Fund will operate. While the Minister has stated that she will take advice from the HEEF Board on distributing the dividends to universities, this advice must be based on the best strategic investment propos- als which support Australian Government policy with respect to diversity, specialisation and responsiveness to labour market needs. It is unclear exactly what this means or what criteria will be used to assess responsiveness to such policies. While the Fund is reportedly able to receive philanthropic donations from the private sector, and will be able to manage individual institutions’ endowments, it is unclear how such dona- tions are to be managed and distributed and whether or not the distribution of these funds are subject to the same criteria as the dividends from the principal fund. The Minister has also announced that the board would take into consideration whether universities had been able to raise matching funds, for example from State and Territory Govern- ments, industry, alumni or members of the public. What impact this will have on the amount universities are eligible to receive from the fund is still unknown. What is clear is that despite representing an increased invest- ment in university funding overall, the HEEF represents a further fragmentation of university funding. Universities that are unable to raise matching funding or meet the Government’s diversity and specialisation agenda, criteria which are likely to emphasise narrow commercial rather than public good priorities, are likely to be disadvantaged in accessing the fund, and may even see their overall funding amounts decrease.

14 NTEU ADVOCATE FUNDING Changes to domestic undergraduate full fee places

hanges announced as part of the Budget have completely lifted the cap on the number of domestic undergradu- C ate full fee places universities can offer. In 2005, universities were able to offer up to 35% of their total number of government supported domestic undergraduate places as domestic full fee undergraduate places (25% for medicine), provided that government supported places were filled first. In 2006, this was changed so that universities only needed to fill the Commonwealth supported places in a particular course before accepting full fee students.

Despite the introduction of FEE-HELP loans to full fee students in 2005, domestic undergraduate full fee student loads have never come anywhere near reaching the existing 35% cap, in any discipline. In 2005, domestic undergraduate full fee stu- dents made up only 4.1% of the total domestic undergraduate student load. Removal of the cap on the number of domestic undergraduate full fee places that universities can offer would therefore, on its own, have seemingly little effect on the number of students likely to enrol in full fee places. However, in other changes announced in the Budget, from 2008 universities will only be required to fill allocated Common- wealth supported places within a particular discipline cluster before offering full fee places in that cluster. With the removal of the cap, this means that some disciplines could be entirely or largely filled by domestic undergraduate full fee students, pro- vided the other disciplines within the cluster meet an overall target for Commonwealth supported places. For example, a uni- versity could allocate all its Commonwealth supported places to business and economics students, leaving it free to offer places in undergraduate Law entirely as full fee places. While the Minister has said that she believes that it is unlikely that universities will knock back the Com- monwealth funding for such students, it needs to be asked why else the Government has lifted the cap on the number of domestic undergraduate full fee places it can offer? While it might be unlikely that universities will immediately trans- fer entire courses to full fee status, it is entirely likely that many universities will gradually adjust their discipline mixes according to demand for particu- lar courses. This will result in students being forced to bear an even greater proportion of the costs of their edu- cation, with significant equity and access implications. Domestic undergraduate full fee places are currently largely filled by offering places at lower entry marks than those for Commonwealth supported places. While students with lower entry marks may be capable of undertaking a particular course, the fact remains that such a system is ineq- uitable. Students who can not afford to pay full fees can miss out on a place, despite having higher marks than those that have the money to pay. Further, students who do gain access to a full fee place are also able to transfer to a Commonwealth supported place in the following year, either in the course in which they originally enrolled or in another course, provided they achieve a particular mark. This means that students are able to gain a ‘back-door’ entry to a government supported place. photo: DAVID CLARK

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 15 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS Collective bargaining takes many forms across the world and Australia is a ‘special case’. Collective bargaining in higher ed – a world view

ast year the compilers of a new Encyclopaedia of Higher Education commissioned NTEU to prepare an entry on ‘Collective L Bargaining in Higher Education’.1 NTEU National Office has completed the draft entry, which provides an international survey of many countries in the industrialised and developing world, as well as an outline analysis of themes and trends in labour relations in higher education, as measured against international standards on such matters as academic autonomy and collective bargaining.

It is apparent from the survey that neither labour relations nor In Britain, while each university is a sepa- higher education are immune from the pressures of globali- rate employer, bargaining on most issues sation or the political decisions to allow market forces rule happens at a national level. At the other more aspects of our lives. extreme, in the US all bargaining takes Nevertheless, there is a huge variety in the way in place at the level of a university, and which higher education and collective bargaining are is often completely different for full- organised. Comparing how bargaining works on a time academics, general staff and comparative international basis helps us in Australia casual academics, who are each see that rules and institutions are not laws of nature but included in different ‘bargaining units’. the result of specific political decisions. There is little coordination of bargain- It is a hallmark of a repressive regime that it seeks to ing by unions or employers. suppress or weaken independent trade unions. In Brunei, Australia falls somewhere in the middle Burma, China, North Korea, Laos, Maldives, Oman, Qatar, Saudi – each university has genuinely separate Arabia, Syria, Djibouti, Libya, Sudan, Togo, and Cuba collective bargaining, but NTEU’s coordinated bargain- bargaining rights are effectively absent, and in many other countries ing strategy has succeeded in maintaining industry the situation of unions representing higher education staff is very standards protecting quality and academic freedom, while the Gov- precarious. ernment has enforced a system of ‘pattern bargaining’ by the employ- In other countries as diverse as Malaysia, Mexico and Germany, ers through the Higher Education Workplace Relations Requirements bans on collective bargaining and strike action by public employees (HEWRRs). prevent most university staff from exercising these rights. Australia also stands out by its use of Australian Workplace Agree- Bargaining in many European and Latin American and African coun- ments (AWAs). Several surveys of international labour standards have tries, such as France occurs in a way which would appear quite strange indicated that Australia is the only country in the world where an to us. The right to strike is allowed – in France it is guaranteed by the employee can be offered a new job, a promotion or a pay rise on the Constitution – but terms and conditions are set by the Government basis that he or she gives up the right to collectively bargain. AWAs and the Government effectively funds any pay increases. This means and the HEWRRs have put Australia in direct breach of International that the result of “negotiations” is a Government decision rather than Labour Organisation (ILO) Conventions on the right to collective bar- an Enterprise Agreement. Most strikes and other campaigns are nec- gaining, and the NTEU has lodged complaints with the ILO about how essarily “political protests” in that they involve the Government rather these policies have deprived Australian university staff of internation- than the higher education institution itself. In countries such as Kenya ally recognised human rights. NTEU has also complained to UNESCO and Nigeria, (see article on p.21). This highlights the differing status of university staff. In countries While all breaches of human rights are serious, many university such as Australia, Sweden, the UK, the US, New Zealand and Canada, staff in other countries face repression and even violence for assert- staff are not Government employees – even if they are employed in ing their collective bargaining rights. public universities. Ken McAlpine, Senior Industrial Officer However, even within this framework there is considerable varia- 1. The draft entry is not available prior to any editing or publication. This article represents only some of the themes and issues tion in the way collective bargaining occurs. identified by the authors.

16 NTEU ADVOCATE RESEARCH The RQF game begins...

fter several years of discussion and planning, the AResearch Quality Framework (RQF) is about to become a reality for staff working at Australian universities. Paul Kniest reports that universities are currently in the process of selecting their RQF teams, to be finalised by 31 January 2008 when each university submits their Expression of Inter- est to Submit (EIS).

The EIS will include information on which research groups and how many researchers will be included in their RQF Evidence Portfolios. In deciding which research groups and how many researchers to include in their evidence portfolios, each university will be taking into account that the RQF results will not only be used to provide rank- ings of their institution’s research performance in terms of quality and impact (that is how it will perform on the RQF gold-silver-bronze medal tally) but also that the results will also be used to distribute about $570 million of discretionary research funding per annum. That is, in deciding which research groups and how many research- ers to include in their RQF teams most universities will be conscious not only of how many gold medals they are likely to win but also what impact the RQF results will have on the level of RQF related funding they receive. Challenge of the RQF game

The difficulty that universities face in competing in this game is that do not know how many dollars will be attached to the ratings they receive because the Government is yet to make it make it clear how from university to university and therefore researchers at different RQF ratings will translate into funding outcomes. universities will not be playing on a level playing field. This creates great uncertainty for staff because they do not know While most researchers would no doubt consider it far more pref- what selection strategy their university will adopt. Will it be highly erable to be selected in their university’s RQF team, they need to selective where only those researchers that have a realistic chance understand that the final preparations will be very intense and time of winning a gold or silver medal are included or, will it be more consuming given the highly complex and detailed administrative inclusive because the university anticipates it will maximise the procedures. They will have to spend much of their working time over funding outcome by increasing the number of researchers selected the next six to nine months in preparing and finalising very detailed for inclusion? information for inclusion in evidence portfolios. The answers to these questions are critical because they will determine who will make the team and who is likely to left out. The Failing to make the team unfortunate reality is that the selection strategy adopted by different universities may be very different, because the relative importance The consequences for staff who fail to be included in their institu- of discretionary funding to be distributed by the RQF differs signifi- tion’s RQF submission are likely to be far more profound. From the cantly between universities. beginning of the RQF development process, NTEU has been con- Based on 2005 data, the amount of funding that universities cur- cerned that giving individual universities the power to select what rently receive from the RQF pool varies from less than $1 million and and who they will include would lead to a clear and distinct divide 1% of total income to over $60 million and more than 5% of total between the teaching and research functions of staff employed at income. In other words, the relative importance of the reputation/ our universities. funding criteria which might determine who is on the team will vary continued on p.19

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 17 RESEARCH

RQF: Can a sow’s ear be a silk purse?

Associate Professor Greg McCarthy, Faculty of Politics, University of Adelaide

NTEU National Vice President (Academic)

cademics and university administrators from around the country are taking up Jonathan Swift’s challenge of trying to Aturn the sow’s ear which is the Research Quality Framework (RQF) into a silk purse. The RQF raw material is research output; principally 4 best publication combined into a group for evaluation.

In part, this model is based on the British Research Assessment users’. Given the difficulty and group-specificity of the Exercise (RAE), at the very moment when the RAE is being whole assessment process, these members will likely refitted. The critical aspects of the RQF sow’s ear are, how- be passengers. As a result, the other nine assessors ever, peculiarly Australian. will have to carry the whole assessment load. The RQF eschews a one-in-all-in and discipline-based Compounding the problem in Australia is the approach for selectivity and artificiality. Austral- distrust the Government has of universities ian universities are currently in the throes of an to be objective in assessing their research exercise in research simulacra, in simulating outputs. Unfortunately, DEST seems to research groupings to achieve the all-con- have been inculcated with this line quering prize of 5-quality-rating groups. of thinking. Consequently, there Needless to say, this simulacrum is a is a complex process of finding far greater administrative burden on objective measures to evaluate researchers and administrators than research outputs to some over- the British model. Universities are arching index, such as the Web obliged by the RQF rules to regard of Science. researchers as pawns on a chess- Unlike the RAE, where dis- board with prestige as the ‘cheque- cipline panels assessed their mate’ for Federal Government own respective outputs, there funding and international student is the search by DEST to have appeal. However, as there are no extra a generic ranking system. Such government funds attached to the RQF a supposed objective approach it is essentially a redistribution exercise will tend to favour conservative of shifting funds to research winners. over cutting edge outputs. In brief, measurability will outweigh all The ‘social-impact’ measure other criteria There is nothing wrong with The second peculiarity of the RQF universities having to articu- model is its social-impact measure. At one late the relationship between the level this can be read as merely continuing the research and community benefit. What Government’s politicisation of the higher education is objectionable is that the RQF model is so util- sector, rewarding those institutions who have been more supportive itarian in drawing a straight line between research and economic of Government policies. But the stress on social-impact as defined impact. In reality, the lines between research and impact are often by 4 case studies (ranked A to E) and adjudged by the 13 Assessment shaded, crossed-out, redrawn, and then coloured by a different Panels, distorts the whole assessment process. disciplinary hue. The Panels will not only have to assess research quality in all of its For instance, in my field of political science one of the most sig- respective disciplinary differences, but social-impact. To achieve the nificant impacts on society was the 1967 Referendum but no single latter the Government has instructed the Panels to include three ‘end- continued on p.19

18 NTEU ADVOCATE RESEARCH The RQF game begins... continued

continued from p.17 These concerns have been confirmed by Deakin rights of affected staff, NTEU believes that the widespread University’s proposal to introduce a new academic adoption of ‘teaching only’ positions will result in massive staff classification called ‘teaching intensive’ aca- under investment in the human and intellectual capital demics. Despite Deakin’s efforts to sell these necessary to sustain the social and economic responsi- positions as giving recognition to staff who have bilities of our universities, as neatly put in a recent OECD demonstrated outstanding performance or lead- report: ership in learning and teaching, there is no doubt An institution is being managed on a financially sustainable that the proposal is directly linked to the RQF. It basis if it is recovering its full economic costs and is invest- appears that Deakin is trying to reduce the number ing in its infrastructure (physical, human and intellectual) at of teaching and/or research staff who would be a rate adequate to maintain the future productive capacity eligible for inclusion in the RQF, or in other needed to deliver its strategic plan and to serve its students words minimising the number of eligible staff and other customers. excluded . Teaching only positions are unnecessary because as Tim NTEU anticipates that attempts to sep- Birkhead from the University of Sheffield said in a recent arately classify or create what effectively article: will become ‘teaching only’ academic ...university departments operate like social insect colonies, positions will become a feature of thriving on an effective division of labour: some excellent most, if not all, Australian universities at research. as more of them determine their RQF The Union would argue that current academic classifica- selection strategies over the coming tions and workload clauses governing academic work are months. sufficiently flexible to allow an efficient division of labour The creation of ‘teaching only’ or based on collegiate decision making principles. ‘teaching intensive’ positions is nei- ther desirable or necessary. In addi- Paul Kniest, tion to the obvious impacts that the NTEU Policy & Research Officer creation of teaching only positions will have on the professional and industrial NTEU information on RQF c www.nteu.org.au/policy/current/rqf

research exercise. Likewise, affiliates who play such a critical role in Can a sow’s ear be a silk purse? many areas, especially health sciences, seem to be excluded. Additionally, a number of institutions have used the RQF as an continued from p.18 excuse for (or threatened) staffing changes, such as teaching-only researcher could or would dare claim credit for what was a broad- positions. Many universities have adopted a top-down approach, col- based research effort, critically inflected by a social movement seek- lecting and sorting information on staff, without due consultation or ing constitutional justice. Expressed another way, impact models involvement of the staff. In other institutions, staff members have deliberately reduce the collaborative role of university research to been inculcated into the divisive selection process of evaluating their some competitive scientist myth of a lone researcher making a break- peers, under the imperative of putting forward the most prestigious through that is commercially patented. The danger will be that the groupings to maximise the collective good of their institution. mythology will then drive funding and research behaviour. In sum, the RQF model is a sow’s ear. Even with the immense amount of time and money that universities are spending on the A negative transformation of research RQF, the likelihood of turning it into a silk purse, remains, as the adage implies, impossible. However, in this game of making the unreason- In the end, the overall public good of university research is in danger able reasonable, there is much at risk. Immense damage can (and of being transformed by the RQF model into story telling of the best was in the UK) imposed onto higher education in directing research outputs and the best impacts, ignoring the actuality of the accumula- into a narrow band of universities and fields. tive processes of research inquiry. We are already beginning to witness the negative effects of the RQF Although universities are only at the mid-point in forming their on such matters as collaborative versus competitive research, on the groups for submission, already we are beginning to see the same teaching-research nexus, and on the divisions within and across uni- negative behaviour as that in the UK. Institutions have ‘poached’ staff versities, as researchers are deemed in or out of the assessment exer- taking all their research credits with them. Early career teachers are cise. Academics need to challenge both the lack of research integrity in a state of limbo, not knowing whether they are in or out of the but also the industrial divisiveness of the RQF.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 19 INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS QUT School of Humanities & Human Services NTEU campaign against proposed school closure

Associate Professor Gavin Kendall, School of Humanities and Human Services, Queensland University of Technology

n 20 April 2007, the Vice-Chancellor of Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Peter Coaldrake, visited the School O of Humanities and Human Services. Most of the members of the School were expecting some discussion of restruc- turing, as this had been foreshadowed over the last year. But the announcement Coaldrake made revealed a more radical intent. He made a number of proposals, including discontinuing the BA and the BSocSci, and closing down the School. The Human Services staff were to be moved to the Faculty of Health, the Languages staff were to be moved to a faculty as yet undecided, and as for the rest of us… well, it wasn’t quite clear.

Like most of my colleagues, I expected these discussions – which all To the extent that there were intellectual reasons canvassed for of us agreed needed to happen – to continue in vigorous fashion, but these proposed changes, they were that Creative Industries, a Faculty we certainly weren’t alarmed for our jobs or our futures at QUT. After QUT set up in 2001, had now usurped the space of the Humanities, all, less than a year before, Peter Coaldrake had told an earlier meet- and we had been squeezed out. ing of the School that there would be no pink slips, no slash and burn; that’s not QUT’s style, he said. Alternative courses However, in the ensuing discussions, Coaldrake suggested there would be redundancies, putting about 28 academic and profes- It seemed a shame to us that no one considered the possibility of sional staff at risk of losing their jobs. The academic areas covered integrating the School of Humanities and Human Services into the by this group include History, Geography, Sociology, Political Science, Faculty of Creative Industries – after all, we’d add a lot to their teach- Applied Ethics, Asia-Pacific Studies, Australian Studies, and Interna- ing profile (it seems odd to teach journalists, for example, who can’t tional and Global Studies. study politics, sociology or history), and we have a number of inter- nationally renowned researchers who would improve Creative Indus- A university without a BA? tries’ research profile (our School has one of the best publication output records in the University). Hardly ever did discussions of intellectual matters behind these We also have a very high number of Research Higher Degree Stu- changes take place. Nor were there discussions of the social vocation dents (about 90, or maybe 13% of the University’s total), and a proud of the University, or even of the idea of having a university without a equity record with our Indigenous, disabled and SES students. Our BA. Such topics have attracted the attention of much of the media teaching regularly tops the University’s own ‘satisfaction with teach- attention around the proposed closure, not least because many find ing’ rankings. Yet none of this seemed to be enough to save us. the idea of a university without a BA, and without a focus on the sys- The major reasons given for the closure of the School were eco- tematic disciplines, a rather abhorrent idea. nomic and reputational. We were losing money, our students had Certainly this was the force of emails I had from colleagues from entrance scores that were too low, not enough students went into overseas. ‘Do you want to look like a trade school? Is this the begin- full employment, and our attrition rates were too high. Much of this ning of the MacUniversity?’ were typical of my colleagues’ horrified data is contestable and we continue to contest it as our campaign responses. against the closure continues.

20 NTEU ADVOCATE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS

The management is guilty of making a spurious correlation here, as they are comparing our perform- ance with that of faculties located at the inner-city Geneva hearings put campuses (the School of Humanities and Human Services is located on the Carseldine Campus, 14km to the north of Brisbane; it is difficult to get students spotlight on HEWRRs to go out to this campus, as they generally prefer the inner-city campuses at Gardens Point and Kelvin Grove). The problem the University has in making the Carseldine Campus work seems to be being blamed n 2006, NTEU lodged official complaints with the International on the School of Humanities and Human Services. ILabour Organisation (ILO) and with UNESCO. These complaints are about WorkChoices and the Higher Education Workplace Rela- Support for the campaign tions Requirements (HEWRRs). They allege breaches of important international treaties and other instruments to which Australia is Although this has been a depressing time, the vig- a party. orous student campaign against the closures has amazed and fortified us, and shocked the University’s The rights of university staff in Australia are meant to be protected by Conven- managers. tions of the International Labour Organisation and, in the case of academic It has been gratifying to see how much the stu- staff, the UNESCO Recommendation on the Status of Higher Education Teaching dents value what we teach them, and their courage in Personnel. standing up for what they see as the integrity of the NTEU’s complaints are being considered by an ILO Committee of Experts, university system. And the support and collegiality which brings together eminent international legal and industrial experts from of NTEU has been important to us all – I am certainly many countries including Australia. glad to be a member of the Union, and I think without The key ILO Conventions protect the right to freedom of association, the right them we’d have been dead and buried already. to organise, the rights of workers’ representatives and the right to collective bar- gaining (Conventions 87, 98 and 135) Unanswered questions The UNESCO Recommendation protects institutional autonomy, academic freedom, the right to collegial and consultative decision-making in academic Aside from the human cost – to undergraduate and matters, and the right of staff to have their conditions of employment deter- postgraduate students, to professional and academic mined through bargaining between their unions and employers. staff – we are left with many unanswered questions, The Committee of Experts has already considered NTEU’s complaints at an including these: initial hearing. Despite being given many weeks to respond to the Union’s com- • New national educational policy directives are plaint to the ILO, the Australian Government failed to make a response by the seeking to reposition the very subjects QUT is specified date, and this has delayed the hearings into 2007. throwing into question – especially history and The table below contrasts just a few of Australia’s treaty obligations Australia geography – as key to the new school curriculum. with our Government’s actions under the HEWRRs: How will QUT ensure its Education students get a degree worth having without these subjects? Treaty obligation Government’s aim under HEWRRs And what about the rest of the 40,000 students Promote collective bargaining. Force individual AWAs on universities at QUT – are they to be denied the humanities and their staff and social science training which will add depth to their studies? Provide proper facilities to workers’ Trying to evict union offices from • If QUT are successful in eliminating the humanities representatives (unions), including campus. and social sciences to follow a market niche, will training. Banning trade union training from Agreements. other universities try the same strategy? • Will Science be next? Are universities heading Give primacy to union representatives Attempt to undermine union repre- for a brave new world in which market demand, over other staff ‘representatives’. sentatives. vocational training, and the desperate search for Special job security for academic staff ‘Streamlined’ disciplinary procedures. a niche lead to the systematic disciplines becom- to protect academic freedom. Greater use of casual and fixed-term ing surplus to requirements? Should we join this employment. race to the bottom, or should a university like QUT – a university that makes a lot of money – take ILO Conventions c www.ilo.org/ilolex/english account of more than just the bottom line? NTEU’s ILO complaint c www.nteu.org.au/campaigns/higheredatrisk/international/ilo For more information on the campaign against the proposed closure of the NTEU’s ILO complaint c www.nteu.org.au/campaigns/higheredatrisk/international/unesco School of Humanities and Human Services, and how to get involved: c www.nteu.org.au/bd/qut/humanities/campaign Ken McAlpine photo: ross gwyther

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 21 EVENTS Science meets Parliament

cience meets Parliament (SmP) is an annual event organised by the S Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies (FASTS). The event brings up to 200 scientists from all over the country for face-to-face meetings and forums with Parliamentarians in Canberra. For an entire day, Federal Parliament lives and breathes science in a series of meetings and events which also allow the scientists unparalleled opportunities to witness national decision making at first hand, and to inform this process on important scientific issues. Each year, NTEU sponsors two members to attend. More information: Federation of Australian Scientific and Technological Societies c www.fasts.org

Dr Robin Robertson School of Physical, Environmental and Mathematical Sciences UNSW @ Australian Defence Force Academy

Adjunct Research Scientist Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University

n 27–28 March 2007, Simon Marsland and I had the pleasure of attending ‘Science meets Parliament’ with the sponsor- O ship of NTEU. We were a bit surprised that two physical oceanographers were chosen out of the many disciplines of universities. But we both have been doing work in climate change research and we hypothesised that the Union decided to sponsor climate scientists to address this ‘hot’ topic. By the way, both of us are also involved in research in the Antarctic.

For me, two aspects tied for the best part of the Science meets Parlia- clean coal and sequestration issues. They both were engaged in the ment: 1) networking with many other scientists and learning about conversations, showed interest, and asked pertinent questions. I was their research and 2) discussing the issues with parliamentarians. lucky, according to some of the other scientists, not all Members were I met lots of people and learned about a wide range of topics, tuned in to what the scientists were saying. Also the water issue and including both hot and cold geothermal energy, medical issues of its link to climate are of great concern, at least for these two. all kinds, and the differences in rocks and water between Mars and On the first day, there were a series of speakers and panels which Earth, among other issues. enlightened us about meeting and dealing with politicians and lob- Speaking with the Members was also great. I had appointments byists. There was also a dinner with Will Steffan speaking on climate with John Murphy, the member for Lowe, and Sharon Grierson for change. Both were educational, although I had heard Will’s talk Newcastle. John Murphy was very interested in climate, energy, and before. It was still good. I also attended a breakfast for Women in hybrid cars and asked lots of questions, especially on alternative Science, where Julie Bishop spoke. Some of us attended question energy (geothermal) and hybrid cars (my present car is a hybrid, as session, which I found both interesting and entertaining. I was there was my last car in the US). I encouraged them to continue funding when Peter Garrett presented his Earth Hour Initiative. So at least climate science, although I am new in Australia and still don’t fully some of the members are concerned with climate change and are understand the funding system and climate. Also I am not familiar working toward addressing the problems. with all the climate research going on here, but am working on it. All in all, I learned a lot and enjoyed meeting with the other scien- Sharon Grierson was also interested in the climate issue. But since tists and with the members. I would highly recommend volunteering her constituency includes Newcastle, she was more interested in to attend Science meets Parliament if the opportunity arises.

22 NTEU ADVOCATE EVENTS

Who Dares Wins when Science Meets Parliament

Dr Simon Marsland, Ocean Circulation Modeller, Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, University of Tasmania

n today’s political climate the subject of global warming has become a hot topic. So it is hardly surprising that our federal I parliamentarians selected the climate change issue as a key topic for this year’s Science Meets Parliament. The two day event organised by FASTS aims to train scientists as political lobbyists, while informing parliamentarians about scientific issues. Never heard of it? Don’t worry, neither had I before I was approached by NTEU.

Coincidentally, I had been to my local St Vincent’s op shop the week The meetings were a privilege and a pleasure. But were they really before to buy a suit, and had just had my first haircut and beard trim believing what I was saying: that global warming is real and the sci- in two years (for a job interview with ence behind it mature? Who knows, the CSIRO). So the timing was good but the next week the Prime Minis- for a trip to Canberra. ter announced an extra $44 million Day 1 was for the scientists. A for climate science and I got that series of informative seminars deal- job at CSIRO. ing with all aspects of the lobbying Also, the skills I learnt were easily process. Don’t pick your nose! Try to transferable and I still wear that suit look nice! Keep your message real today. And by keeping the mes- simple! Also time to meet your team sage simple even Mum is starting members and get your story straight: to come around. we were put in a group of three and Oh yeah, nearly forgot. NTEU assigned a politician to meet with also made a big effort on this the next day. event. The flight and hotel book- Then to make sure we were get- ings were made at National Office. ting the idea, we were placed in National President Carolyn Allport another group of three and assigned and Policy and Research Coordina- a second politician. The day ended tor Andrew Nette were very gen- with a meal in the Great Dining Hall erous with their time throughout of Parliament House. Networking the event. opportunities abounded. Business Clearly they were flat chat on cards passed like snow flakes in a Union business while in Canberra, blizzard. It was a long day and finally but nevertheless they made every my brain popped from information effort to include the NTEU dele- overload and a mild prosopagnosia. gates in conversations, and provide Time to sleep. some sage advice from their per- Day 2. With an access all areas sonal wealth of experience in the security pass in hand the mood was lobbying process. festive as I explored the geometrical So, if you ever get a chance to complexities of the Parliament House attend the Science Meets Parlia- interior. FASTS made a big effort to PHOTO: FASTS ment in future years, I highly rec- make sure we were teaming up and ommend it to you. No need to wait able to find the offices of our assigned politicians. It is very important for them to come to you either. I had the impression the Union was to lobby on time! Politicians can be quite busy and don’t take kindly struggling to find delegates this year. to absent minded scientists meddling with the schedule.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 23 EVENTS Humanities on the Hill

ASS on the Hill (HOTH) is an annual event organised by the Council H for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences (CHASS). The June event allows people working in research, education or practice of the humanities, arts and social sciences, to discuss the value of their work with MPs. It is an important opportunity to speak directly to the decision-makers, especially in an election year! Presented here are reports from two of the members NTEU sponsored to attend. More information: Council for the Humanities, Arts and Social Sciences c www.chass.org.au

Associate Professor Gavin Kendall, School of Humanities and Human Services, Queensland University of Technology

ponsored by NTEU, I travelled to Canberra for HASS on the Hill, a yearly event developed by CHASS. The idea is to enable S practitioners in these fields to discuss and promote their work with politicians, lobbyists, and, of course, colleagues. It proved a most interesting couple of days.

First was a briefing day at the National Museum of Australia, where and what it’ll cost them if they ignore you’), it’s another matter to turn we got expert advice on lobbying MPs. We all enjoyed the ‘Dancing these principles into a cogent, short message. The briefing day con- with the Stars’ panel format, in which academics practised describing cluded with a fine dinner at the Lobby Restaurant, where we were all the importance of their work and asking for something concrete from able to put the finishing touches to our preparations for the next day an MP, and then media experts and politicians assessed that perform- in Parliament, and continue our socialising into the night. ance and gave them tips about how to make a better case. On the second day, emboldened by our ‘unescorted visitor’ passes While the principles of speaking to pragmatic politicians were no (a rare privilege), we wandered around Parliament House between surprise (‘tell them what you can offer them, and what they’ll achieve, speeches and private meetings. Julie Bishop and George Brandis

24 NTEU ADVOCATE EVENTS

Peter Pinnington, Don’t lose Rural Clinical School, Australian National University your right to vote!

his was my first HASS On The Hill, where we were briefed on a proposal from CHASS Thousands of Australians Tto be discussed with allocated politicians. The proposal was the expansion the role of risk being ineligible to vote the Prime Minster’s Science, Engineering and Innovation Council and the Chief Scientist. at this year’s federal election due to recent changes to the There was lively debate with some participants met may be aware of your issues and be able to Electoral Act. were not comfortable with the CHASS proposal help. You need to update your of the Chief Scientist with two deputies having Andrew’s proposal was for the development of enrolment details if you: responsibility for, respectively, humanities, arts a national multi-disciplinary centre to promote • Have moved house. and social sciences and science, technology, engi- creative research with a benefit for the arts, sci- • Are not enrolled correctly. neering and medicine. ences (in all its manifestations), technology, busi- • Have been removed from However, this approach is supported by the ness and the environment. When I first talked the electoral roll. Productivity Commission’s latest report which has to Andrew I had to think how Indigenous health When enrolling, or updating adopted the European Science Foundation’s defi- could be accommodated. I came to the realisa- your details, you will need to nition of science being the encapsulation of all tion that, for me, the arts per se are still not uti- meet the following proof of sciences. The argument against was that CHASS lised enough for the advancement of Indigenous identity requirements: would be seen as excluding the natural scientists. culture in Australia, even though they are part of • A driver’s license or pre- The point was made by several that it was not to Indigenous peoples’ lives. scribed identity document exclude them but for HASS to have a seat at the Collaborative research projects with Indige- (such as a passport). table to be included in the overall advice on sci- nous artists and ACA would, I think, enhance their • Or, you must get two ence to government. opportunities for sustainability, but also accord witnesses, who are not Another point to inform politicians about is the ACA and wider Australia opportunities to begin related to you, who have percentage of academe that is CHASS and the to understand what the ethos of Indigenous cul- known you for longer contribution it makes to educating students, to tures is. For me it is, to name two, the longevity of than a month and who the economy and enriching peoples lives. our cultures as well as augmenting the ever-grow- can confirm their identity I was partnered with Andrew Donovan from ing positive well-being of community groups and with a driver’s license or Inter-Arts Office, Australia Council for the Arts Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander individuals, prescribed identity docu- (ACA) to meet Jill Hall MP, Opposition Whip. Ms even in these times of ill-informed press on Indig- ment. Hall knew of an ACA programme called Synapse, enous issues. Check your enrolment status and had a friend – an Aboriginal man – who had We are survivors and that is not recognised by visiting www.aec.gov.au graduated in medicine from the University of enough and such projects would have untold and make sure your voice will Newcastle. I make these comments to accentu- benefits. be heard in this year’s federal ate the point that even people you may not have election. gave us addresses and took questions, and we were also going to debates about where the increasing specialisation of tertiary pro- individual meetings with various MPs and Senators. viders might lead. The pace of parliamentary life – the constant movement between A lunch at the National Press Club featured an excellent address on events, and the sudden need to head off when the division bell sounds the constitution from Greg Craven, Deputy Vice-Chancellor at Curtin – is quite a shock. In general, most colleagues I spoke to thought we University. Greg managed the unlikely task of making the constitu- had a good reception from politicians, all of whom valued the work tion interesting. that we did, but perhaps needed to have it better explained to them Finally, we had access to Question Time in the House, and more how it could help them and their constituents. The case I was particu- meetings with MPs and Senators. I travelled back to Brisbane larly keen to make concerned objections to the proposed closure of exhausted, but I had learned a lot, and had enjoyed my brief immer- the QUT School of Humanities (see article, p.20), and I received many sion in the world of national politics. sympathetic hearings. I am extremely grateful to the NTEU for the opportunity, and for The idea that a tertiary sector based purely on a market phi- all the support and advice they offered while I was in Canberra, and losophy would inevitably lead to irrational outcomes seemed to I’d especially like to thank Andrew Nette and Carolyn Allport for their be accepted by most, and it seems clear that we still need to have collegiality and company.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 25 news INDUSTRIAL from the net RELATIONS PAT WRIGHT ePhones converge

here can be few better examples of the convergence of information and communications technologies than the latest Tgeneration of mobile phones. Perhaps the thoroughbred is Apple’s iPhone, by Mac out of iPod, which was announced with much fanfare in January for release in the US on 29 June 2007 (The introduction video by Steve Jobs can be seen at www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/mwsf07/).

The iPhone combines the functions of computer connections to the in Australia, given their past associations with other AT&T offspring internet and web, iPod MP3 music player and mobile phone – all in the US, but recent criticism of the iPhone’s networking capabilities in one device. The way in which Apple (no longer known as Apple from Telstra rate it at less than 3G – allegedly something like 2.5G. Computer, which they have grown out of, despite some difficulties But maybe that’s just part of the bargaining strategy to get the most with the Beatles’ record company) has integrated the iPhone’s various favourable terms out of Apple. functions is particularly elegant, thanks to new touch-screen tech- Without a carrier network for the iPhone in Australia, there is not nology. Capitalising on the Mac’s ground-breaking use of icons, the a lot of point in rushing overseas to buy one, of ordering one on the iPhone presents a large home-screen with twelve icons to touch in internet. Besides, the recommended retail price of US$599 for the order to access its various functions. 8Gb version could well come down, given the frenzy of development The touch-screen requires no stylus (which would probably be lost of other ePhones by rival companies – many of which are already by most users, anyway) but responds to our built-in pointing device – available in Australia from networks such as Telstra and Vodafone. the finger – or, more likely, the fingernail. For inputting data, the touch Certainly, Apple can afford to cut into their 50 per cent profit margin of a finger can call up on the screen a QWERTY keyboard, a calculator’s in any future price war – a reputable market research company esti- numerical keypad or a mobile phone’s alpha-numeric thumbpad. Of mates that the 8Gb version costs Apple US$245.83 to make. course, you can also talk into the device when in mobile phone mode, though it’s a little large to emulate Dick Tracy’s wristphone (ask some- Cross-eyed one older). The larger-than-regular-mobile-phone size is the price you pay for letting your fingers do the talking when typing a document, The convergent multi-function device market is being attacked in a email or text-message – all of which can be done on the iPhone – or pincer movement, with computer companies adding mobile phone for reading legible-size text in a letter, email, eBook, online newspaper capabilities to their devices and mobile phone companies adding or webpage – all of which can be done on the iPhone. computer capabilities to their devices. In both cases, the add-ons have been at best a little clunky, but the iPhone has inspired a new Eyes over ears generation of seamlessly-integrated devices even before the iPhone itself is on sale. And Apple is not standing still - television advertise- The eyes-over-ears rule is facilitated by the touch-screen technology, ments in the US in advance of ‘i-Day’ show an iPhone with twelve which allows you to shrink the screen image or webpage by pinching icons on its homescreen, whereas the one that Steve Jobs demon- two fingers together across the surface of the screen and enlarge the strated had only eleven icons. Also, financial newspapers in Taiwan image by spreading the fingers across the screen in the obverse of claim that Quanta, the Taiwanese manufacturer of MacBook laptops a pinch. Further, on-screen text is adjusted to a more readable line- and iPods for Apple, have secured contracts to produce the iPhone 2 length by tipping the oblong iPhone from portrait to landscape or from September 2007. vice versa, whereupon the text adjusts and word-wraps accordingly. One development path has seen the humble calculator become Yet still further, when typing into a text-box, the font-size adjusts to a graphic calculator, then added a diary spreadsheet and a contacts fit the box, thus avoiding losing sight of the beginning of a sentence database to combine into an organiser, which with increased com- before you have finished typing the end of it. Of course, this is only an puter capabilities became a handheld computer or Personal Digital advantage to the X- and earlier generations, since the Y-Generation Assistant to which was added mobile phone capabilities to make a have no need of such long sentences. SmartPhone. Such was the path taken by Palm, HP’s iPaq, O2’s iMate, The iPhone, then, deals elegantly with screen images and text, as and, arguably, the Blackberry. The other path saw the mobile phone one would expect, given its computer heritage. Its mobile phone expand its phonebook database to include an appointments alarm, a functions, however, will depend on the telecommunications net- camera, MP3 music player, SMS and email, and even GPS navigation work/s through which it operates. In the US, Apple’s iPhone will part- to make a SmartPhone. Such is the path now being taken by Nokia, ner with IT&T’s Cingular; in Australia, no telecommunication network Ericsson, Motorola and, arguably, Samsung’s Blackjack – the closest partner/s have been identified. Industry analysts were claiming that thing to an iPhone currently available in Australia. the Telstra amigos were interested in exclusive rights to the iPhone continued on p.29

26 NTEU ADVOCATE lowering INDUSTRIAL the boom RELATIONS IAN LOWE

Rough play ahead

ecently I had the wonderful experience of sharing a platform with the Dalai Lama. The occasion was a public forum on RSustainability and Spirituality. The Nobel Peace Laureate had a simple message: we should try to live in harmony with other people and the natural world. It was a dramatic contrast to the politics of this election year. The polls are showing the likelihood of John Howard ending his political career with a humiliating defeat, possibly even making political history by joining Stanley Bruce as the only Prime Minister to lose his own seat at a general election. With the stakes so high, we should not be surprised to see how brutally the game is being played.

David Marr’s recent Quarterly Essay spells out in detail the outra- and obfuscation increasingly indefensible, the response has been to geous personal attacks on my Griffith University colleague, Professor attack the credibility of the scientists speaking out. David Peetz, for daring to publish his research on the impact of Work Judith Brett summarised the situation in a memorable essay pub- Choices. It should not have been a major surprise; the study confirmed lished earlier this year in The Monthly. Most of us, she said, feel we are what most of us know but the Government still denies. Its industrial living in two discordant parallel worlds. In one, life goes on as normal, relations changes have accelerated the we put petrol in our car, we turn on the loss of award conditions, have resulted The government has consistent electricity, we cook with gas and we plan in a fall in real wages despite relatively our superannuation. In the other, we are high levels of employment and have form; faced with reasoned haunted by compelling images of reced- not discernibly improved productivity. criticism, it tries to shoot the ing glaciers and polar bears on shrink- For daring to reveal these truths, messenger rather than engaging ing ice floes, showing that the scientists Peetz was attacked by Joe Hockey’s in debate of the issue. are right and climate change is a serious office with a farrago of half-truths and threat to civilisation. But our leaders bare-faced lies. He was accused of just don’t get it, behaving as if climate having worked in Parliament House in change were just another political prob- Canberra: true, but deliberately mis- lem like dental health or nursing homes, leading, because he had not worked issues you can deal with by throwing for any politician but for the Parliamen- some targeted money at them in an elec- tary Library. He was accused of being a tion year. singer in ‘a trade union choir’ because The old approach of shooting the mes- he had sung in the Brisbane Com- senger, she said, doesn’t work when the bined Unions Choir five years earlier. message is obviously right. All that hap- A poem he wrote after the September pens is that more and more messengers 2001 terrorist attacks on New York and come, like the brooms in the Disney ani- Washington, decrying the ill-judged mation of The Sorcerer’s Apprentice, ‘with Bush response which led to invading their sloshing buckets of water’! Afghanistan and Iraq, was misrepre- The Prime Minister was quoted after sented as supporting terrorism. the most recent COAG meeting as saying photo: Jon Helgason Summing up his case, Hockey told proudly that he values the economy radio listeners [according to Marr] that Peetz ‘writes for trade unions, above everything else – presumably including sensible work-life he sings in the trade union choir; after September 11 he praised the balance and a habitable planet. But opinion polls show the public terrorists as heroes…I never appreciate his commentary on these understand that promoting the economy at the expense of the social issues’. On the basis of this sort of rubbish, a leading academic was fabric has obvious and serious impacts on our families and our gen- dismissed as ‘not credible’. No analysis of the evidence he collected, eral well-being. And the public also understands that promoting the no attempt to refute the logic of his argument, just a dirty personal economy at the expense of the planetary climate system is not just attack, concluding with the sort of chutzpah that has gained Hockey short-sighted but very dangerous. I foresee the Prime Minister and political preferment: ‘I’m happy to deal with the facts’. his colleagues, despite the bluster and the venom of the personal The Government has consistent form; faced with reasoned criti- attacks, being swamped by the rising tide from the sloshing buckets cism, it tries to shoot the messenger rather than engaging in debate of water. of the issue. I have seen the same sort of response to attempts to per- Ian Lowe is Emeritus Professor of Science, Technology and Society suade the Government to respond to climate change. With its denial at Griffith University and an honorary life member of NTEU.

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 27 letter INDUSTRIAL from aotearoa RELATIONS new zealanD NIGEL HAWORTH, AUS

Busy times in NZ higher education

here is a lot going on in the New Zealand university system. Three things stand out – the recent announcement of the Tresearch quality exercise results, the outcome of the recent bargaining rounds and the current amalgamation discus- sions between three of the tertiary sector unions.

Performance Based Research Fund second successive year, tripartism has delivered better than average pay offers across the university sector (a minimum of the 3.73% for The Performance Based Research Fund (PBRF) results were recently general staff and 5.2% for academic staff). This is, in part, because of announced. From a union perspective, the process is very much a $20 million new money for university salaries in the recent budget. curate’s egg. The principle is broadly sensible, but some aspects of its Given the parlous state of the finances of some of New Zealand’s operation are highly questionable. For example, the AUS has consist- universities, these outcomes are reasonable, and something above ently opposed the reporting of individual scores, which, however, are other public sector settlements. Union members are about to move to made available. a ratification ballot, and I judge it likely that they will accept the deal. That said, the most striking aspect of this round’s outcomes was the The money for salaries is only part of the tripartite outcome. Tripar- unseemly jockeying between the Universities of Auckland and Otago tite discussions are also going to address general staff salaries and about which institution came top. In terms of the results, Otago is conditions, the nature of cooperation across the sector and how the No.1 (an appellation currently adorning the University of Auckland’s sector can be sustainably resourced. One of the biggest difficulties webpage as an outcome of the last PBRF round). Notwithstanding in the process is getting the competing Vice-Chancellors (or, at least, the announced results, Auckland argues that it is still really top dog, some of them) to see the opportunities offered by this engagement. and the outcome was a public spat between the institutions. Moving from competition to co-operation is always a challenge. This reflects a far more worrying feature of the New Zealand system. Universities compete red in tooth and claw against each other in a Amalgamation discussions graceless parody of market behaviour. True, the previous funding system did little to challenge this trend, but the effect has been to Amalgamation discussions are in train between the AUS, ASTE (the pit university against university and promote the usual consequences polytechnic sector academics’ union) and TIASA (the polytechnic – staff poaching, the inexorable growth of marketing budgets and general staff union). A proposed union structure is currently doing staff, endless branding of institutions, programmes and the like, and the rounds amongst union members, and conferences and ballots a ‘devil take the hindmost’ attitude to national interests. towards the end of the year will decide whether the amalgamation The current government appears to be fed up with this behav- will go ahead. iour and is introducing a far stronger element of planning in to the The idea of the merger is driven by a combination of factors: joint national university system. Supported by the unions, these moves interests, the emergence of the tertiary sector as a broader context have yet to gain the fulsome support of the universities’ corporate in which to organise, and the efficiencies offered by a larger union, moguls. A big culture shift is needed. especially in terms of building higher union density. There is a robust debate going on, but there is a real, possibility Tripartite salary settlement that an amalgamation will occur. All will be clear by December. Busy times. Meanwhile, the combined university unions are currently moving Nigel Haworth is President, Association of University Staff (AUS) to ratify the outcome of the latest tripartite salary settlement. For a AUS  www.aus.ac.nz

28 NTEU ADVOCATE regional INDUSTRIAL focus RELATIONS JENNY AUSTIN Is Howard a born-again believer in higher education?

here’s been a mixed response in regional areas to the Federal Government’s apparent renewal of interest in Higher Edu- T cation this close to the election, and it’s not just about the money. Good work everyone – your continued lobbying has obviously paid off with the Howard Government now realising that higher education is likely to be an important issue for voters, and subsequently increasing higher education funding in the recent Budget.

Do your sums… courses, there are 70 course options to choose from in Victoria alone. And each one is competing to net the same students with very similar On the other hand, when you consider Opposition estimates that broad-based courses for what is actually a hugely diverse industry. have the Howard Government eroding higher education funding by There’s no question that universities should prepare its graduates 20 per cent over the term of its office, the apparent increase in fund- as professional people for the real world of industry, but 20 years ago ing doesn’t appear to have made up the lost ground. the economic rationalists introduced a conflict within our universities And is it just me, or do these 2007 which we still haven’t resolved. and 2008 comparative figures released If you closely analyse any set of graduate by Federal Education Minister, Julie The Prime Minister’s real interest attributes put together by any Australian Bishop (see Table 2. p.13), on balance in higher education is to gain university, you can clearly see the tension not fit your definition of a bonanza? between the notion we should be prepar- So I think it’s too early just yet to rest control of the curriculum and ing students for a job, and the teacher’s on our lobbying laurels; we need to restrict academic freedom. task of instilling in them, a love of learning maintain (and even ramp up) the rage. (a highly unfashionable phrase under the Howard Government). …and then take a closer look The commodification of higher education began under the Dawkins reforms in the 1980s but it has reached a zenith under Howard. The But there’s another reason that we need to be concerned about the Prime Minister’s real interest in higher education is to gain control of Howard Government’s sudden, renewed interest in higher education. the curriculum and restrict academic freedom. He’s already encour- It’s setting its cap, if successful at the election, at wresting control aged the introduction of intelligent design (creationism) into the from the States over governance of the nation’s universities. school science curriculum. To be certain, there are accountability issues regarding the man- So in addition to the series of lies he’s told us over the past two agement at some universities, demonstrated no more vividly than terms of office, the new low he’s delivered in moral leadership, and the recent Singapore campus debacle by the University of NSW (see the industrial war he’s waged on workers, I won’t be voting for the report p.5) and Central Queensland University’s massive job cuts in Howard Government because I believe that universities should the face of higher executive salaries. encourage free, independent and creative thought. On the management of portfolios, there’s also a lot of work to be They shouldn’t be sausage factories pumping out clones of done in relation to the supply of courses which are relevant to the Howard’s elite, equipped with nothing more creative than liberal eco- world that graduates will enter three or four years hence. nomic doctrine on the major issues facing the world. For example, the Melbourne Age reported in April that while there’s Jenny Austin is the Marketing Publications Manager and a boom in student and industry demand for environmental science occasional Social Science and Media tutor at Southern Cross University, Lismore, NSW ephones converge continued... Ears over Eyes continued from p.26 Of course, the first designer to incorporate voice recognition soft- As well as developing their own devices, some companies are con- ware into such devices, so that we can talk to our devices, rather than sidering partnerships or takeovers to get the best of both worlds. The typing, touching, thumbing, pinching or punching data, text or com- business press has suggested that Nokia, the world’s biggest maker of mands in, will probably dominate the market. At least we will have handsets, is stalking Palm, the longest-established makers of organis- someone to talk to, even if they are smarter than us. Then the ven- ers. This has prompted Motorola, the world’s second-biggest maker triloquist’s dummy might well ask ‘Which one is me?’ of handsets, to consider a similar move to maintain market share. Pat Wright is Director of the Centre for Labour Research at the University of Adelaide. email: [email protected]

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 29 INDIGENOUS NEWS New National Indigenous Officer

dam Frogley (pictured right) is taking over the position of NTEU National Indig- A enous Officer in July. Adam is a Taungerong/Woi-Wurrung man from the Yarra Valley region of Victoria. He was born and raised in the town of Healesville, which is situated in the Melbourne’s outer eastern suburbs, approximately 70km from central Melbourne.

Adam has held many different positions with State and local government including the Aboriginal Community Development Officer for the Shire of Yarra Ranges, through to his recent position as Manager of the Indigenous Programs Unit for Swinburne University, a post he has held for a period of five years. ‘Working for and with my own community continues to be a rewarding and challenging experience,’ Adam said. ‘I am looking forward to continuing to work on a national stage for NTEU and the Indigenous community.

Indigenous Forum 2007 NTEU NATIONAL INDIGENOUS tackles broad range of issues FORUM MELBOURNE 5-6 MAY 2007

he 9th NTEU National Indigenous Forum was held over the 5–6 May T 2007 in Melbourne. The event was well attended. with almost 50 attend- ees coming from all states and over 20 branches.

In addition, the Forum was attended by enous Higher Education Advisory Coun- three Maori guests from Aotearoa: Fiona Te cil (IHEAC). Momo, Robb Leighton and Lee Cooper from Delegates had the opportunity to par- the Association of University Staff New Zea- ticipate in training sessions on ‘Knowing land. Northern Territory ALP Senator Trish your workplace rights’, ‘Developing Branch/ Crossin was the guest speaker at the Forum Division based industrial campaigns’ and dinner. ‘Media and Communications’. 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE This year, another broad range of issues The Forum also took the opportunity, 1967 REFERENDUM ON were covered over the two days, including upon the retirement of Joel Wright to INDIGENOUS RIGHTS discussions on the Research Quality Frame- acknowledge and express gratitude for the work, implementation and enforcement of tireless and uncompromising work done the Indigenous Employment Strategies in over the last six years in his capacity as NTEU Union collective agreements and the work National Indigenous Officer. being done by NTEU on the National Indig- Minutes from Indigenous Forum 2007 are available at c www.nteu.org.au/getinvolved/equal/indigenous/forum/07mins

30 NTEU ADVOCATE YOUR UNION Casuals Conferences: Building momentum for

photo

:

ro positive change ss gwy

th

e

r

s part of NTEU’s National Casuals Campaign, Casuals A Conferences and Forums were held in each State over May and June, successfully bringing casual academic employ- ees together from almost every Australian university. Providing opportunities Sharing common problems

The conferences were designed to provide Many casuals reported common problems opportunities for casual academic employ- such as non-payment and underpayment ees to join together to discuss employment for work performed. Difficulties in being paid problems and develop ideas for how these appropriately, especially to compensate for can be tackled in the future. Almost 200 excessive marking and student consultation casual academics participated nationally, due to large class sizes, were almost univer- representing the full range of discipline areas sal. Other themes that arose included lack of and university demographics. integration into departmental/school cul- Conference participants had the opportu- ture and inadequate facilities and resources. nity to hear from union officials and represent- Unsurprisingly, the issues that arose in dis- atives about the historical aspects of casual cussion at the conferences mirrored the pre- employment and its regulation, together liminary findings of NTEU’s online survey of focus of the conference sessions on poten- with data on the (over)representation of academic casuals on www.unicasuals.com. tial solutions, with many casuals offering casuals in the university workforce. This Many casuals were concerned about creative ideas as to how such problems can background was a good starting point for the lack of a career path, especially those be tackled both through collective bargain- the detailed discussion to follow about the embarking on the ‘academic apprenticeship’ ing and through campaigning directly at the experiences of casual employees as lectur- of PhD study. The question of job security local Branch level. ers, tutors and research assistants. and career development was a particular continued overpage... AZE M : jANE photo Above: Angela Cincotta speaking at the ACT Casuals Conference. Top: Participants in the Queensland Division Casuals Conference

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 31 YOUR UNION buchanan

ea r and : photo Above: Chris Latham (Murdoch University) talking at the WA Casuals Conference. Below: Delegates make a point at the Victorian conference

...continued from previous page Positive outcomes

Members agreed that one of the most posi- tive outcomes of the conferences was the opportunity to meet and create ongoing links with other casuals at their institutions. Networks have been developed both at a State and Branch level to ensure casuals can remain in contact with one another and work together on the issues raised at the conferences. d The conferences have been a successful l focal point for the campaign for improve-

ments in casual conditions of employ- acdona m ment, and have served to start the debate i rr te

amongst casuals and in the Union about : the issue of casual academic employment

and how conditions and job security can be photo improved. Casual academics are determined CASUAL? to see the Union achieve real gains in the next round of bargaining, and to remove And the book voucher winners are... some of the worst employment abuses in the short term. The two lucky winners of our National Casuals Campaign compe- Stay tuned for more news on the campaign tition were Andy Scerri (RMIT University) and Pam Etcell (Murdoch SESSIONAL? and the upcoming National Casuals Confer- University). They each will receive a $200 book voucher for a book ence where further work will be done. store in their city. Josh Cullinan and Sarah Roberts, Congratulations to both members, and thanks to everyone who National Industrial Officers took part in the competition. For more information on how NTEU NTEU is the union can assist casual staff, please visit www.unicasual.com.au. for all university staff. NTEU understands casual For more information on the campaign, academic work usually isn’t all roses. Casuals have no job security and often face contact Sarah Roberts  [email protected] problems like underpayment, poor facilities and little collegial or Josh Cullinan  [email protected] and professional recognition. Get Active. Get Covered. or visit NTEU’s dedicated website for university casuals Find more information online at www. c www.unicasuals.com.au unicasual .com.au WIN A $200 BOOK VOUCHER! See reverse of this bookmark

32 NTEU ADVOCATE YOUR UNION SA Casuals Conference a success

n June, NTEU South Australian Division hosted a conference for academic/research casuals from the three SA uni- I versities: Adelaide, Flinders and UniSA. The day comprised an information session, groupwork opportunities and a chaired panel discussion featuring Nigel Palmer, National President of CAPA, Division President Greg McCarthy and representatives from NTEU and the universities.

The conference was well attended and Under-resourcing was an issue of signifi- fear – often justified – that any attempt to extremely well received. All attendees cance for these staff. The majority do not protect, improve or defend their conditions presented logical and well thought out have offices, storage, desks or computers or rights will be met with unemployment scenerios for discussion and the groups available to them at the universities. No for the next teaching period. developed excellent strategies for the NTEU provisions are made for reimbursing staff to take into its next round of bargaining. for the volumes of printing they must do Positives and negatives in their own homes, they must rent lock- Discussing common issues ers on campus if they want somewhere to Many expressed their appreciation of the put their marking while they teach other flexible hours they worked, and the posi- The groups uniformly agreed that the courses and a high percentage must pay tive ways casual hours fit into their lifestyle number one problem facing academic a levy to have enough space provided in needs, but wished they could have this and casuals was the formula used to determine their email inboxes to even read the que- a modicum of security. the rate of pay, and its exploitation. All staff, ries from students. Prizes were awarded to a very unfortu- many of whom have been tutoring for more The third significant issue facing these nate participant who detailed a sad story than 5 and up to 25 years (and do not con- undervalued employees was an inability to of bullying adversely affecting her employ- sider it a casual undertaking at all), agreed access superannuation benefits awarded ment, and also to the group that came up that over time they have been expected to to continuing staff. Many revealed that with the most effective (and achievable) complete significantly more administra- against their best intentions and greatest strategy for improving casual employment tive tasks than ever before, with no extra desires they had agreed to sign AWAs this at SA universities. money to do it. year in order to be allowed to salary sacri- There were many more pertinent con- Employers are not taking into consid- fice to superannuation. cerns developed and discussed at the con- eration the high volumes of email traf- In relaying all of these issues the partici- ference, than will fit in this article, but that fic endemic in all work, and assume that pants also detailed the underlying fear they will be invaluable to NTEU in developing paying 1 to 2 hours for consultation is all had in saying it out loud. The extreme the next bargaining strategy. generous. vulnerability of their contracts manifests a Juliet Fuller, Organiser, UniSA Branch NTEU r e ll u F iet l Ju : photo Katy Obsorne, Sigrid Christianson and Jess Nitschke chat with Lisa Lines, University of Adelaide Branch Organiser

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 33 YOUR UNION Recent Human Rights Actions by NTEU

TEU National Office regularly sends letters to foreign governments and companies in support of imprisoned or victim- N ised educators and workers, upon the request of education and human rights organisations.

For more information, please visit the organisations’ websites: Amnesty International  www.amnesty.org Australian Council of Trade Unions  www.actu.asn.au Education International  www.ei-ie.org LabourStart  www.labourstart.org SYRIA IRAN CUBA NIGER PHILLIPINES

ETHIOPIA

Syria CHILE Action requested by: Amnesty International Addressee: Minister of the Interior Action: Letter re safety of six students from the University of Damascus, whose whereabouts are unknown and feared Cuba to have been forcibly returned to Iran. Five are UN recog- nised refugees and one is an asylum seeker. Action requested by: Amnesty International Addressees: Raúl Castro Ruz, Head of State and Government Action requested by: Amnesty International Action: Letter re former prisoner of conscience Martha Beatriz Addressee: President Assad Roque Cabello. Has been threatened with imprisonment Action: Letter re Ali Sayed al-Shihabi, arrested for ‘attempting to by security forces unless she abandons her political form a political party and signing the Beirut-Damascus activities. Declaration’. Chile Ethiopia Action requested by: LabourStart Action requested by: Amnesty International Addressees: Señora Presidenta Michelle Bachelet Addressee: Minister of Education Action: Police shooting of 26 year forestry worker during strike. Request for investigation into the killing and assurances Action: Letter re Wasihun Melese and Anteneh Getnet, prisoners that workers’ rights will be respected. of conscience arrested for their non-violent trade union activities. Niger Phillipines Action requested by: Amnesty International Addressee: His Excellency Peter Odili, Governor of Rivers State Action requested by: Amnesty International Action: Letter re the safety of the Executive Director of the Insti- Addressee: President Gloria Arroya tute of Human Rights and Humanitarian Law – received Action: Letter re escalation in political killings and repression in death threats and his car was attacked. Philippines since 2001.

34 NTEU ADVOCATE YOUR UNION New Branch Organisers in Queensland

TEU is please to introduce three new staff members working in Branches in the Queensland Division. Please say ‘Hi!’ N if you see them out and about on campus.

He has a strong union background being an active member of various unions all of his working life. Ivan is also a member of Ivan Phillips the Lockyer Branch of the Blair Electorate ‘Your Rights at Work’ Branch Organiser committee. Ivan has an interest in Muay Thai kickboxing in which he has University of Southern been active as a trainer for 15 years. He says kickboxing ‘keeps Queensland me young and gives me a good fighting edge.’ c www.nteu.org.au/bd/usq In July, Ivan Phillips begins the role of Organiser at our USQ Branch in Toowoomba. He takes over from Hugh Wilson who NTEU would like to thank for his efforts over the last eight months. Cheri Taylor Ivan is a recent graduate from USQ, majoring in history and inter- national relations. At the moment he is enrolled in the Honours Branch Organiser Programme; his dissertation is a comparison between the ‘Work- Queensland University of choices’ legislation and the 1904 Conciliation and Arbitration Act, as well as the Harvester Decision. It will highlight how ‘Workchoices’ Technology has eroded the conditions set down in these two documents. Cheri comes to NTEU from the United Firefighters Union where she worked as a Research Officer following the completion of her Iran degree. Cheri adapted to the demands of a Branch Organiser based on campus quickly – she identified the priorities for the Action requested by: ACTU Branch as recruitment, organising and maintaining and develop- Addressee: President, Islamic Republic of Iran ing the delegates network. Action: Arrest of teachers and members of the Teachers Trade Cheri strongly believes in the team based approach adopted in Association in Iran for demonstrating on 14 March over the Queensland Division and sees the role of the Branch Organ- fair wages and working conditions. iser as central to balancing the competing demands of growing the membership and servicing the existing members. www.nteu.org.au/bd/qut Action requested by: Amnesty International c Addressee: His Excellency Ayatollah Sayed ‘Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader Action: Letter re arrest and incommunicado detention of student Asghar Akbarzadeh – prisoner of conscience. Jen Tsen Kwok Branch Organiser Action requested by: LabourStart Central Queensland University Addressee: President, Islamic Republic of Iran Action: Message of concern re jailing of union leader Mansour Jen comes to NTEU from a casual academic background at the Osanloo in in response to bus drivers strike. University of Queensland and continues to chip away at a PhD in sociology. Previously he has conducted focus group research for NTEU’s Queensland Division looking at attitudes held by early- Action requested by: Amnesty International career academic, general and NESB university staff. Addressee: Ayatolla Mahmoud Hashemi Shahroudi, He is passionately interested in human rights, political rights and Head of the Judiciary Indigenous social justice issues. Because Jen is new to both central Action: Letter re arrest of six Amir Kabir Polytechnic students Queensland and union organising he is chiefly concerned with – detained in connection with publications deemed to creating substantive networks and alliances in the region. ‘insult Islamic sanctities’. c www.nteu.org.au/bd/cqu

JULY 2007 www.nteu.org.au 35 Contacting NTEU National Office 1st Floor, 120 Clarendon St, b...... phone Southbank, VIC 3006  ...... fax ...... email PO Box 1323, ...... website South Melbourne, VIC 3205 b (03) 9254 1910 NT Division  (03) 9254 1915 PO Box U371,  [email protected] Charles Darwin University,  www.nteu.org.au Darwin, NT 0815 b (08) 8946 7231 WA Division  (08) 8927 9410 c/- Dr Lyn Bloom  [email protected] Queensland Division Secretary, NTEU WA Division www.nteu.org.au/bd/nt  27 Cordelia Street, PO Box 3114, Broadway LPO South Brisbane, QLD 4101 Nedlands, WA 6009 b (07) 3846 2355 b (08) 6365 4188  (07) 3846 5977  (08) 9354 1629  [email protected]  [email protected]  www.qld.nteu.org.au  www.nteu.org.au/wa SA Division NTEU Office, Humanities Bldg, Flinders University b (08) 8201 2656 NSW Division  (08) 8201 3807  [email protected] Level 1, 55 Holt St, www.nteu.org.au/bd/sa Surry Hills NSW 2010  b (02) 9212 5433  (02) 9212 4090  [email protected] ACT Division  www.nteu.org.au/bd/nsw G Block, Old Admin Area, McDonald Place, ANU, Acton, ACT 0200 Victorian Division b (02) 6125 2043 ANU/ADFA/ACU (02) 6201 5355 UCan 1st Floor, 120 Clarendon St,  (02) 6125 8137 Southbank, VIC 3006  [email protected] NATIONAL OFFICE STAFF b (03) 9254 1930 www.nteu.org.au/bd/act  (03) 9254 1935  Officers & Central Resources Unit  [email protected] Executive Officer–President ...... Mark Probst  www.nteu.org.au/vic Executive Officer–General Secretary...... Anastasia Kotaidis Tasmanian Division IT Manager ...... Michael Riley ICT System Administrator/Help Desk...... Tam Vuong GPO Box 252-101, University of Tasmania, National Indigenous Officer...... Adam Frogley Hobart, TAS 7001 Indigenous Project Officer...... Gregg Fryer b (03) 6226 7575 Administrative Officer–Resources...... Tracey Coster  (03) 6226 2172 Administrative Officer–Reception...... Tim Rodrigo  [email protected] www.nteu.org.au/bd/tasmania Industrial Unit  Industrial Unit Coordinator...... Eleanor Floyd Senior Industrial Officer (Strategy & Policy)...... Ken McAlpine Industrial Officers...... Sarah Roberts, Josh Cullinan Industrial Resource Officer ...... Sam Maynard NATIONAL EXECUTIVE Industrial Administrative Officer...... Laura Mondon National President...... Carolyn Allport Policy & Research Unit Vice-President (Academic)...... Gregory McCarthy Adelaide Policy & Research Unit Coordinator ...... Andrew Nette Vice-President (General)...... Jo Hibbert UWS Policy & Research Officers...... Paul Kniest, Emma Cull General Secretary...... Grahame McCulloch Policy & Research Resources Officer ...... Alex Scholtzer National Assistant Secretary...... Ted Murphy Recruitment & Training Unit Executive Members Education & Training Officer...... Moreen Lyons Lyn Bloom WA Div Andrew Bonnell UQ Membership Records Officer...... Melinda Valsorda Derek Corrigan ANU James Doughney VUT Communications Officer ...... Paul Clifton Tom Dunning Tas Div Chris Game NSW Div Administrative Officer...... Julie-Ann Veal Ian Hunt Flinders Margaret Lee Qld Div Matthew McGowan Vic Div Shane Motlap CDU Finance Unit Neil Mudford ACT Div Jeanette Pierce RMIT Finance Unit Coordinator...... Jenny Savage Kevin Poynter CSU Jeannie Rea VU Finance Officer (Branch Accounts/GST)...... Ranji Sundar Tom Stewart UWA Susan Bandias NT Div Finance Officer (Payroll)...... Joanne Gatt Finance Officer (Fees Receivable)...... Jayne van Dalen Indigenous Executive Member...... Terry Mason UWS Finance Officer (Fees Receivable)...... Alex Ghvaladze

36 NTEU ADVOCATE 129x98 24/8/06 13:11 Page 1

Every year, over 2007isanelectionyear. two million men and women lose makesureUget their lives from 2haveyoursay! unsafe work.* You need to enrol to vote or update your *Source ICFU enrolment details if you:  Have moved house recently.  Are not enrolled correctly. Is it fair?  Have been removed from the electoral roll. MAKE LIFE FAIR EVERYWHERE, BECOME A GLOBAL JUSTICE PARTNER. Recent changes to the electoral laws place added restrictions on the time you have to enrol or to change your enrolment once an election has been called. Union Aid Abroad APHEDA Enrol to vote or update your details now to make sure that The overseas humanitarian aid agency of the ACTU you get to have your say at this year’s federal election.

Call 1800 888 674 For further information and to obtain an or visit www.apheda.org.au enrolment form, visit www.aec.gov.au Authorised by Grahame McCulloch, General Secretary, National Tertiary Education Union, 120 Clarendon St, Southbank, VIC 3006 Image: Josef Kubicek

How to check your membership details

UPDATING YOUR NTEU MEMBERSHIP DETAILS online at www.nteu.org.au In order for NTEU to keep you informed and in touch, it is important that we have your latest details. If any of the following points apply to you, please change your details online (see directions at right), or contact your local Branch or the National Office.

MEMBERSHIP DETAILS CREDIT CARD/DIRECT DEBIT PAYMENTS Have you moved house recently? Have your credit card (ie expiry date) or direct debit  If you have nominated your home address account details changed? as your NTEU contact address, you must  Please notify us immediately. update it. Are you leaving university employment? Has your family name changed?  If you are no longer an NTEU member, deductions Have your workplace details changed? will continue until the National Office is notified. Has your Dept/School had a name change or merged For all credit card and direct debit enquiries, please with another? contact: Alex Ghvaladze, Finance Officer Are you moving to a different institution? ph (03) 9254 1910 email [email protected]  Transfer of membership from one institution 1: Login to the ‘Members Area’ to another is not automatic. ID = Your NTEU membership number PAYROLL DEDUCTION PAYMENTS Have your employment details changed? Password = Your surname in CAPITALS Have your payroll deductions suddenly stopped without  Please notify us to ensure you are paying the 2: Go to ‘My Home’ correct fees. your authority? For any of the above membership enquiries, please  contact your payroll dept urgently. 3: Select ‘Your Profile’ contact: Melinda Valsorda, Membership Officer Payroll deduction queries should be directed to your 4: Select ‘View Details’ Branch or Division office. ph (03) 9254 1910 Only personal details can be altered online. email [email protected] There has never been a better time to invest in a UniSuper pension

Generous asset test Fully rebateable income Tax-free benefits for exemptions before 60 dependants The 50% Centrelink asset test Any tax paid on pension income All benefits paid to many exemption for new pensions before reaching age 60 is now dependants are now completely ends on 19 September 2007. offset by the full 15% rebate. tax free.

Tax-free income after 60 More eligible for the Continue working via All pension income is now tax age pension ‘transition to retirement’ free once you turn age 60. Changes to calculations will see From age 55 you can use some more people eligible for the age of your super to buy a pension pension than ever before. income stream whilst working.

An advantageous start to the new financial year The Government’s Better Super changes haven’t just provided for those who are saving for retirement. There are great opportunities for people who are ready to start using their retirement savings as well. If you open a Term Allocated Pension or commercial rate Indexed Pension before 20 September 2007, then 50% of the money you use to buy your pension will not be counted when determining your ongoing eligibility for Centrelink’s age pension. And, even more money is put in your pocket via full or partial tax relief on the income drawn from UniSuper pensions. You’ll pay no tax if you’re aged 60 or over and, if you’re under age 60, 15% of your assessed income can be used to offset income tax liabilities.

And the good news doesn’t end there More people will become eligible for the age pension than ever before. Previously, once a certain level of assets was achieved, every additional $1,000 of assets would reduce your Centrelink age pension entitlement by $3. From 20 September 2007, your entitlement will reduce by just $1.50, effectively halving the impact of higher asset holdings. Also, all superannuation benefits paid to dependants (under the ATO’s definition of a dependant) are now completely free of tax.

If you’re over 55 and still working, you’re not left out in the cold ‘Transition to retirement’ may provide the best of both worlds if you’re aged 55 or above. It means that you can take some of your super as a pension while you are still working. This gives you access to the above Centrelink asset test exemptions and income tax rebates. Plus it may also provide further income tax advantages by using salary sacrifice and living on a combination of take-home pay and pension income.

Find out more today www.unisuper.com.au/pensions | [email protected] | 1800 331 685

Before deciding to acquire or to hold an interest in any UniSuper product, you should consider whether it is appropriate for you and consider the Product Disclosure Statement, which is available from your employer or the product issuer, UniSuper Limited (ABN 54 006 027 121, RSEL No. L0000925); 37/385 Bourke Street, Melbourne Vic 3000.