Green Left Weekly's Rachel Evans spoke to Damien Cahill, vice-president of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) at the University of Sydney about the campaign against staff and other cuts. Cahill is a senior lecturer in the Political Economy department at the university.
What level of cuts to teaching staff is Sydney University trying to make?
Sydney University is a large university. There are around 7000 staff at this university with about 50,000 students. One hundred full-time, permanent contract staff have been given notices they will be made forcibly redundant.
A further 65 [academic] staff have been given the option of redundancy or positions with a teaching only focus, with a minimal amount of research capability.
Has the grassroots campaign shifted management on these proposed cuts?
Yes. We have had victories. Out of the 100 staff targeted, 20 now are off the forced redundancy list. That is, 20% of staff. All targeted in the anthropology department are now off the list. Furthermore, 20-30 staff members have accepted a redundancy package.
That leaves about 50 to 60 members who are still on the list for redundancy. Also, about 29 or so people within the list of 65 have accepted teaching-focused roles. We still have 30 to 40 people in that situation.
Which departments are most affected by the proposed cuts?
University management has spread the cuts across all departments. The accounting department originally had 10 staff members that received these redundancy and teaching-only notices.
That was 30% of staff in that department. It was huge cuts. Interestingly, the political economy department has not been targeted. There is no pattern to their proposed cuts, these are arbitrary decisions.
Sydney University management is crying poor, but they made $113 million in profit last year. Why are they making these cuts? Are the Federal government introducing massive cuts to higher education?
University management and [state] Liberal and Labor federal governments bear responsibility for these proposed cuts. At a university level the university management has chosen to prioritise big-ticket building items over students and staff.
We also believe that university management is trying to use these cuts to improve research output rankings.
By way of explanation, in 2010 the Australian Research Council initiated an “Excellence in Research for Australia” (ERA), which alleged to aim to “promote research excellence within Australia’s higher education institutions”.
Under this, staff and departments are ranked on how many journal articles are published. Higher rankings under the ERA for university institutions, results in more funding from the federal government.
Yes, and documents leaked from management two or three months before the proposed staff cuts identified there needed to be more teaching conducted to increase the ERA performance figures. We think the pretext of budget cuts is to justify management’s hidden agenda of getting rid of staff, to improve its research rankings.
So management are sacking staff and reducing some to teaching-only roles to increase the research output of the university?
Yes, it’s not rational. Neoliberalism is not logical. It is not necessary to make these cuts, and it is correct to target university management because they are the ones making the cuts. But all of this is part of a broader marketisation of campus push, led by federal governments – both ALP and Liberal parties – since the 1980s.
The National Tertiary Education Union recently took Sydney University management to Fair Work Australia. FWA ruled a stay on the universities redundancy plans until they had consulted staff. Can you comment?
The NTEU sees FWA as inherently biased in favour of employers. But in this case, we did win a small concession out of the hearing. However, this doesn’t mean university management will listen! If the university sticks to their plan, the final letters telling staff they are being made redundant will be sent out on May 8.
But there may be a delay. Even if this does happen, and university says this is our final decision, we then have the option of appealing under the enterprise bargaining agreement (EBA) and asking for a formal review of the decision.
This appeal and review could take months and there is the possibility of going, again, to FWA. This could be a very long, drawn out process. And all throughout this process, we will be leading a strong grassroots staff and student campaign of mobilising the campus against the cuts.
There are now cuts to other campuses, the Australian National University and Macquarie University, but they started here at Sydney University. What do you say to those other campuses?
Well Sydney University is a bellwether institution. What management try to do to us, and how the students and the staff respond, resonates throughout the sector. Other universities are going down the path of trying to sack staff to improve research output performances. But we are also showing the way in terms of leading a militant and strong fightback.
Has the NTEU Sydney entered into a formal bargaining period? What does that mean you can do? Can you conduct strike action in this period?
According to FWA a union can start bargaining three months before the official EBA period. The NTEU’s main issue this EBA is job security — trying to strengthen the EBA so that management can’t arbitrarily sack staff in the future.
During this period we can take protected industrial action, which we will do if management doesn’t agree to our demands for improved job security.
Under FWA we need 50% of the entire NTEU membership to take part in a secret ballot before we are authorised to take action. And then, after half of the membership takes part in the ballot, 50% of them have to vote yes to industrial action. NTEU Sydney is the largest branch in the country, so we have to get around to a lot of people.
We have a lot of support, in 2009 the NTEU Sydney conducted two ballots and both were a success. But the rules FWA have in place are biased in favour of employers and limit ability to take industrial action. FWA has to be changed – unions need to engage in a concerted campaign to change the FWA.
What is NTEU's plan of action to stop staff and course cuts? How can students help?
I have to say the student campaign has been fantastic – very well organised and broadly militant. The solidarity between staff and students has been first rate and this is the sort of relationship that should be replicated throughout Australia.
In the anti-Vietnam War campaign of the 1970s, students were given A+ for activism. Should they be given the same today?
Yes, well, students should be given A+ for activism. They have done extremely well!
