Concerns about NTEU members
Note: Case 3 noted below is the case of Robert Austin.>>> "Jeanette Pierce" 11/24/05 12:14 pm >>>
** High Priority **
To all members
The Branch is involved in a number of cases that are raising serious concerns about the university's approach. While the Branch has always endeavored to maintain constructive relationship with the university these concerns have potential implications for all RMIT staff members and therefore cannot be just quietly tolerated. We are seeking discussions with senior management, but if we are not able to resolve our concerns members may need to consider that we take visible and public protest action and defend our interests over the coming months.
In the process of representing members the Branch has become concerned about the university's interpretation of relevant agreements and policies. The Branch is dealing with a number of cases, in which it is apparent to the Branch, that the university is more than willing to take an aggressive stand in spite of legitimate and reasonable alternatives. We are particularly concerned about members being subjected to harsher treatment based on past perceived differences with their local management or because of their Union association.
The following are real cases that illustrate our concerns;
Case 1. A staff member and Union delegate in FSG has decided to accept early separation for his own personal reasons. The Branch had expressed serious concerns that this position was targeted because of the staff members Union association. The staff member was under enormous pressure to accept the early separation and their decision in no way diminishes the Branch's concerns about the way management frustrated redeployment options and placed obstacles to every alternative suggestion that was made by the Union to avoid the redundancy.
Case 2. An academic staff member of 18 years in the School of Management who, under strong pressure, has accepted early separation as part of the university targeted 180. At the same time the School is advertising a number of similar academic positions which raises serious questions about the real reason our member has been targeted and is being pressured out of a job. In addition the School and Portfolio are insisting she leave on Dec 20th and be deprived of Christmas closedown entitlements. Agreed departure dates of Dec 31st have been widespread practice elsewhere in the university and it is appalling and mean spirited way to treat anyone. In this case the Branch asked the VC to directly intervene and ensure this long standing member has an effective departure date of Dec 31st.
Case 3. The Branch is currently in dispute with the university over the university's decision not to confirm employment of a probationary academic member in the School of International and Community Studies. The Union has repeatedly and unsuccessfully asked to see the evidence on which this decision has been made. The Union vigorously defends the right to natural justice and a proper and transparent probationary process. The Branch will not accept the university's right to dismiss any member, probationary or otherwise for no clear reason or for reasons that may interfer with academic freedom. The rights of academic staff to participate and express opinions in public debates are protected under Schedule 2 clause 5.6 of our Enterprise Agreement. At this point the dispute is with the university but if the Unions concerns cannot be resolved we will have no hesitation in escalating this case to the Australian Industrial Relations Commision.
We are comitted to protect members interests, therefore if management is going to treat the new industrial climate as an invitation to disregard legitmate input from the union and to become aggressively punitive then we will be meeting with members in the new year to discuss ways of using our collective strength wherever and however it will have the most effect.
Jeanette Pierce
President
RMIT Branch NTEU
posted by Defend Our Universities committee @ 11:24 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home