Connect 12 02 by NTEU

VOLUME 3 Vol. 12 No. 2 No. 2

August 2010 August 2019

THE MAGAZINE FOR AUSTRALIAN CASUAL & SESSIONAL UNIVERSITY STAFF

VOLUME 3 No. 2 August 2010

Introducing the National Tertiary Casuals Committee The 'benefits' of casualisation Professional development for casual academics The Flipped Classroom: Pedagogical innovation or creative tutorial cuts? International and insecure: a casual tutor's story NTEU champions breastfeeding accreditation The UON Academy: Rationalising casualisation Insecure employment the reality for 2 out of 3 Victorian university employees

read online at www.unicasual.org.au ISSN 1836-8522 (Print)/ISSN 1836-8530 (Online)

-INSIDE1

Confronting insecure employment â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the next few years

Casuals Charter campaign at UQ

12 The Flipped classroom: .Pedagogical innovation .or creative tutorial cuts?

Attacks on HECS must stop

14 A student 'evaluation' dismissal

ANU Casuals Charter unveiled

NTEU champions breastfeeding accreditation

Professional development for casual academics

10 National Tertiary Casuals Committee

A casual tutor's story: International and insecure

16 The UON Academy: Rationalising casualisation 18 Lessons from the .Chemist Warehouse strike

Halting wage degradation at UWA

International Mentor Program: Signs of failure

20 Insecure employment the reality for 2 out of 3 .Victorian university employees

The 'Benefits' of Casualisation

22 Delegate Profile: Victoria Fielding

Editor: Alison Barnes Production: Paul Clifton Editorial Assistance: Anastasia Kotaidis Cover image: Matthew Hull-Styles, NTEU member at the University of the Sunshine Coast, with his children Sadie and Reuben, taking industrial action in May in support of a better deal for casuals in the USC Enterprise Agreement. (Credit: Lachlan Hurse) For information on Connect, please contact the NTEU National Office: Post: PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Phone: 03 9254 1910 Fax: 03 9254 1915 Email: national@nteu.org.au Web: www.unicasual.org.au www.nteu.org.au The views expressed in this publication are those of the individual authors, and not necessarily the official views of NTEU.

In accordance with NTEU policy to reduce our impact on the natural environment, this magazine is printed on 100 per cent recycled paper: produced from 65 per cent postconsumer waste and 35 per cent pre-consumer waste.

NTEU Editorial

Confronting insecure employment – the next few years The Coalition’s re-election promises more bleak times for the higher education sector. Perhaps the biggest challenge facing us is the continuation of the freeze in university funding, with the level of Commonwealth Grants Scheme (CGS) funding capped at 2017 levels for the foreseeable future. How different universities manage the funding freeze will impact on workers across the sector, especially those who are insecurely employed. The Government has also had universities tilting at windmills following the French Review of freedom of speech on our campuses. While Justice French found there was no ‘crisis’ of free speech, he recommended universities adopt a voluntary code to protect academic freedom and free speech. NTEU members have a long and proud history of defending academic and intellectual freedom. We have consistently stated that the only effective protections for academic freedom and intellectual freedom of university staff are the relevant clauses in enterprise agreements, negotiated and enforced by NTEU members. In spite of attempts by management at many Australian universities to water down academic freedom protections or remove them from legally enforceable agreements, the NTEU has consistently and effectively protected academic and intellectual freedom.

Casuals Charter campaign at UQ

NTEU members across the country are running workplace campaigns to enforce the existing provisions for casual employees and seeking to minimize the levels of exploitation. These workplace campaigns demonstrate the importance of building our strengthen campus. Building our strength and capacity in our workplaces is central to our ability to hold university managements to account. Looking to the future, the majority of university collective agreements have a common expiry date, June 2021. This opens up the possibility of more effective and coordinated campaigning across campuses, to try to address the blight of insecure employment. Get on board and help us plan and prepare so we can ensure employment security is the norm across our universities. abarnes@nteu.org.au

Alison Barnes NTEU National President As a first step towards implementing the Charter, the School has called for a paid casual representative on the School’s Teaching and Learning Committee. The School of Communication and Arts has also added paid casual representation to their Teaching and Learning Committee.

The Casuals Charter was launched at the University of Queensland (UQ) in September 2018, and the campaign to promote it is continuing. We have undertaken numerous activities, including stalls to collect signatures on postcards to demonstrate to the Vice-Chancellor that we have support for the Charter among the students and staff at UQ. The postcards will be delivered to the VC within the next few weeks. We have also continued to seek engagement at the faculty and school level. The Charter has been adopted by the School of Languages and Cultures. It was raised at a school staff meeting by NTEU delegate and Branch VicePresident Annie Pohlman where it was well received by the staff.

The prospect of a change of government brought the possibility of some legislative relief for casual employees, but the election outcome has snuffed out that possibility for now. Meanwhile the problem continues to grow, unchecked. After lobbying work undertaken by the NTEU, the Victorian State Government required Victorian universities to provide accurate numbers of staff employed insecurely. These figures revealed that on average 63% of staff at Victorian universities are employed casually or on fixed term contracts, with figures as high as 73% at Monash and Melbourne Universities. Doubtless these figures would be reflected nationally. This is unacceptable.

We sought and had a meeting with the Provost about casual issues. The discussion centred on types of employment and while there were no conclusions the outcome was broadly positive. We will meet with him again in the coming months. We also continue to campaign in various schools in the University. Since the Charter was launched the number of casual activists has increased and they now come from a wider range of schools and faculties. As our campaign has broadened it has become apparent that underpayment of casuals is being practiced in several areas. The Casuals Caucus is involved in organising to ensure pay justice and prevent wage theft and to change school policies so that it cannot happen again.

, our poorly remun erated lass. Our labour is locked on an academ ic underc contin gently, paid by the hour, and ed of Queen sland relies We are employ ed We are casual ly employ g at the Univer sity are rarely heard. highly exploit ed. ing Teachi ng and learnin gnised , and our voicespment . We are highly qualifi ed but nothindevelo contrib utions go unreco and for promo tion the out of opport unities is are but there about We and casual our ers rejustice of tion. ted are situateachWe dedica ted we deserv e for everyo ne. And mitis poorly comineffic ient and unfair but this system is underc lass. Our labour, and our ic lia, ers. Austra academ in an on search sity system unreco gnised Queen sland relies bone of the univer are the Univer sity of We at the backg heard. learnin and rarely ng the better than this. Teachi tingen tly, paid by ucontrib utions go remun erated , our are locked out of opport pvoices conmotion and develo but ed employ ed qualifi highly ly hour, and proed. We are casual nities for are there is nothin g casual ment. We chers. We are the ploitand commi tted resear we deserv e betrs teache highly exted but dedica ne. And situati on. We are and unfair for everyo g at the Univer sity of employ ed ient ineffic the injusti ce of our is learnin lia, but this system labour about this. Teachi ng and ic underc lass. Our sity system in Austra backbo ne of the univer land relies on an academ utions go unreco gnised , contrib than ed contin ter remun erated , our heard. We are employ Queen svoices are rarely opport unities and locked out of ed is poorly paid by the hour, are highly qualifi We . pment our but there and motion and develo casual ly employ ed gently, ly exploit ed. We are ce of our situati on. We are prosystem is for casual about the injusti in Austra lia, but this but highuniver sity system Queen sland of the of sity ne Univer backbo the chers. We are the ng and learnin g at is nothin g lass. Our labour is and commi tted researwe deserv e better than this. Teachi an academ ic underc dedica ted teache rs contrib utions go for everyo ne. And remun erated , our ineffic ient and unfair are rarely heard. nised, and our voices relies on , paid by the employ ed contin gently poorly unities for promo opport of out locked ed unreco gare highly qualifi develo pment . We are We casual ly employ ed ly exploit ed. We are hour, and ted teache rs tion and on. We are dedica lia, but highinjusti ce of our situati sity system in Austra g casual about the backbo ne of the univer deserv e better than this. but there is nothin we chers. We are the for everyo ne. And and commi tted resear ineffic ient and unfair but this system is

Kate Warner, UQ Branch Organiser

rter #UQCasualsChaasual s www.nteu.org.au/uq/c

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

CAPA Column

Attacks on HECS must stop The Australian student loan scheme is crucial for facilitating educational attainment for those who possess the inclination and ability to go to university. Australia’s globally-acclaimed Higher Education Loan Programme (HELP) – previously known as Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) – is designed to allow access to university for those who do not have the means to pay upfront, deferring payments until they are earning a full-time wage. Numerous countries including New Zealand, England, Japan, and the Netherlands have implemented student loans schemes closely based on the Australian model. Initially, our loan scheme represented a point of compromise, shifting a small amount of the cost of university tuition – previously paid for entirely by the Government – onto the student. Crucially, the elegantly designed repayment scheme meant that graduates only began to pay back their debt once they were earning a decent wage, usually as a result of their increased earning capacity. By design, those who remained in economic hardship did not have to pay back their loans. Since its creation in the late 1980s, HECS has undergone numerous changes which erode its intention of enabling equitable access to education. Over the past few years, the pace of these changes has been intensifying. In 2018, the Federal Government made significant reforms to HECS, with the goal of reigning in the escalating student debt on their books. Government attacks on HECS-HELP over the past year have included lowering the income repayment threshold; aggressively pursuing loan repayments from those living overseas; and, most perniciously, implementing a borrowing cap which is insufficient to cover the cost of postgraduate study. As of the new financial year, the lowered income repayment threshold means that those with student loans must begin paying back sooner than they anticipated. It is the borrowing cap, however, which will limit opportunity the most. Any student whose tuition fees cost more than the cap must pay the remainder upfront. This is already leading to an American-style market for private student loans for those who do not have the cash on hand to pay their fees. This is predatory behaviour towards those who can least afford it. Last month, more legislation attacking HELP was introduced to the lower house. This legislation, which is expected to pass the Senate, introduces two new fees relating to the administration of student loans. The new fees are levied to the educational provider rather than to the student directly. Of course, these fees will end up being passed to students, either through an increase in fees for postgraduate and international students, or through a reduction in services available to students. While the new fees are a relatively small sum, they represent the Government’s increased push to restrict higher education to those who can afford it. If the Government’s genuine concern is to take control of the escalating national student debt, these piecemeal reforms are the wrong way to do it. The debt on their books is increasingly made up of loans for postgraduate study. There is no limit on how much higher education providers can charge for postgraduate coursework degrees. Masters-level degrees are eye-wateringly expensive, particularly at prestigious universities. Regulating the cost of postgraduate study is the most effective way that the Government could cut down on their lending. By transferring more and more costs onto the individual, those who cannot afford these fees will be unable to access university – which was the very problem which HECS was created to solve. The Government’s gradual withdrawal of their support for HECS-HELP marks a shift towards a higher education system which magnifies, rather than redresses, inequality. Disturbingly, the end of demand-driven funding for undergraduate places has led to recent calls for the Government to deregulate undergraduate study. Deregulating postgraduate coursework fees has been a disaster. Subjecting undergraduate degrees to the same treatment would amplify the existing issues in the higher education sector. School-leavers who have had every advantage will be able to buy a place at university, while others will not have that opportunity. The re-elected Coalition Government is continuing to attack universities and public education. More than ever, it is essential for progressive organisations like CAPA and the NTEU to continue to stand for fairness and equity in the university system. Natasha Abrahams is the President of CAPA president@capa.edu.au www.capa.edu.au www.facebook.com/CAPA.Au

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

Natasha Abrahams CAPA President

ANU

Casuals Charter unveiled By Lachlan Clohesy ACT Division Organiser

ANU members met in June to unveil a Charter of the Rights of Academic Casual Staff. The unveiling follows the launch of a similar Charter at the University of Queensland in 2018. The Charter outlines the minimum conditions to guarantee dignity and respect for casually employed academic staff at ANU and provides a template for future campaigning. The Charter launch was well attended by NTEU members at the ANU, including many members who are not casually employed themselves but came to express solidarity with their colleagues. This is a crucial point – as the percentage of staff on continuing or fixed-term contracts continues to shrink, it is vital that we all come together to tackle casualisation as a means to address broader problems of job security. While the meeting discussed job security, however, other considerations were also raised. ACT universities have rates of casualisation which – while high – compare favourably to other universities interstate. This discussion was about more than just the number of people who are casually employed, it was about the conditions of those who are engaged in this way. The meeting heard from casually employed staff on their experiences, including problems of underpayment and late payment, inconsistency between different areas of the university, a lack of

institutional support, a lack of career progression, and difficult situations in which tutors have found themselves acting as the contact point for pastoral care of students. We also discussed how these issues relate to non-casual staff, and difficulties faced by non-casual staff in tackling this issue. This Charter was made possible by the hard work of a group of casually employed members who are determined to organise to address casualisation. Two of the group's members, Simon Copland and Blair Williams, addressed the meeting and talked about why they got involved with the campaign. Lina Koleilat, who unfortunately was unable to attend but did so much to organise the meeting, also deserves a special mention. The meeting heard about campaigns in other states, and those which have occurred previously in the ACT, which had organised members to bring about change. Finally, we discussed problems associated with marking for casual staff which have inspired an ANU-wide Marking Pay Audit campaign. If you'd like to be involved in driving campaigns on casualisation, we're looking for people to join our organising group. While many in the group are casually employed, others are in fixedterm or continuing positions – all are welcome. If you’re not at ANU, talk to your Branch Organiser about how to campaign on issues affecting casuals at your university. Below: ANU members celebrate the launch of the Charter.

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

NTEU champions breastfeeding accreditation By Kelly Thomas Senior National Industrial Officer

For many breastfeeding mums, it can be confronting to decide when to make the call to stop breastfeeding. Pressure can come from other mothers, partners, teething babies, or the general community. Often, that pressure comes from the workplace or a need to return to work.

• Normalises breastfeeding through support for breastfeeding women.

There are countless horror stories about mums being told to pump in the toilet, store breast milk in the lunch fridge or made to feel bad about needing to express. These are all things that can lead to women stopping breastfeeding earlier than they’d like to.

NTEU intends to write to each university in Australia providing them with information on how to achieve accreditation. We are seeking universities’ commitments to working with ABA and NTEU, to become a Breastfeeding Friendly Workplace. The goal is to ensure that the higher education sector is the first to be completely ABA accredited so that breastfeeding mums are welcome at any university across the country.

The challenges faced by mums returning to work are more starkly faced by those with insecure jobs. The need to return to financial stability, because of the limited access to paid parental leave, means those casually employed, or on fixed-term contracts, are more likely to return to work while breastfeeding. They’re also more likely to feel vulnerable about requesting time to express breast milk. Like other workplace issues, the issues for breastfeeding mothers dramatically compound for women employed in non-ongoing roles. There are also women in higher education who, because of their deep connection and passion about the work they do, want to return to the workplace to continue to progress their work or research. Whatever a new parent’s circumstance, the ability to return to work with all the necessary support can make an already challenging time less stressful. That is why NTEU is seeking to combine forces with the Australian Breastfeeding Association (ABA) to encourage all Australian universities to obtain the status of Breastfeeding Friendly Workplace. A Breastfeeding Friendly Workplace: • Has a dedicated area which is clean and private to breastfeed or express milk. • Offers paid time during workday to breastfeed or express milk.

While many universities already have some of these features (indeed some have already taken the step and obtained accreditation) there exists a shortfall in many universities to ensuring the transition back to work is seamless for all parents, but especially breastfeeding mums.

Is your university accredited? Universities that have achieved ABA Accreditation – well done!

NTEU and ABA seeking university’s commitment to accreditation Some breastfeeding friendly features

Need a bit more work

Flinders

Edith Cowan

ACU

Macquarie

Charles Darwin

Curtin

Newcastle

UniSA

Murdoch

UNSW

Bond

UWA

UTS

Griffith

Batchelor

Canberra

James Cook

Adelaide

Deakin

QUT

CQU

La Trobe

Sunshine Coast

UTas

USQ

Southern Cross

Charles Sturt

Wollongong

Sydney

RMIT

UNE

Swinburne

Western Sydney

Melbourne

ANU Monash FUA VU If you’d like to find out more, speak to your local Women’s Action Committee member or check out the ABA website: www.breastfeeding.asn.au/workplace

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

Professional Development for Casual Academics By Dr Audrey Statham Deakin University

If neoliberalism’s 'loudest message' is 'that there is no alternative to the status quo' (McChesney 1999), then the volume has been turned up full blast recently in Australia and in Australian higher education. When Federal Labor lost the ‘unlosable election’ after campaigning on a progressive policy agenda, the take-home message seemed to be that we should give up the struggle for social justice. This same message was targeted at casual academics earlier this year by an article which appeared in The Conversation that portrayed the casualisation of academic labour as a fait accompli which casual academics have no option but to accept (see article, p. 8). However, we can opt not to passively accept such messaging and take it instead as an indication of the extent to which neoliberal forces will go to prevent people from thinking social change for the better is possible. By this logic, the concerted efforts of vested interests to persuade the Australian population that there is no alternative to the growing social and economic inequality generated by neoliberal policies, is motivated by fear of the power of the many which should give us cause for hope not despair.

Professional development workshop for casual academics Cultivating hope in the power of casual academics to collectively unite to bring about a more socially just world for ourselves and our students was the driving purpose of the second Victorian Division Professional Development workshop for Casual Academics held on Thursday 4 July. Casual academics from universities and TAFEs around the state attended the half-day program which the University of Melbourne hosted. The program brought together in one forum sessions for developing research, teaching, campaigning and organising skills. Acknowledgement of Country was made by Victorian Division Assistant Secretary, Sarah Roberts, who introduced the first half of the program which consisted of the session, ‘How to be a researcher while casual’ by Dr Tseen Khoo and Dr Jonathan O’Donnell, co-creators of the blog, The Research Whisperer, and the session, ‘How to improve your sessional teaching practice’ presented by me. The second half comprised the session, ‘How to build a campaign – and win!’ by Victorian Division Secretary, Dr Mel Slee, and ‘Building collegial workplaces (also known as organising!)’ by Senior State Organiser, Chloé Gaul, with Annette Herrera and Ben Kunkler.

Value-oriented intellectuals An inclusive democratic approach informs this professional development program’s design which challenges the commonsense assumption that developing casual academics’ research and teaching skills ought to be undertaken in isolation from developing organising and campaigning skills. Rather, it holds that these belong together because such a democratic perspective pre-supposes that, in the context of the neoliberal university, developing professional identity ought to be understood as an educative process that is not separate from but inclusive of promoting the activism of delegates, both casual and ongoing. Here, Noam Chomsky’s (2016) distinction between two sorts of university intellectuals seems instructive for understanding a kind of professional identity that might be capable of creating what Jane Kenway et al. (2015) term ‘spaces of hope in the Neoliberal University’, and thinking about how this might relate to what it means to be a delegate. While the professional identity of 'value-oriented intellectuals' is one that vents their disgust 'with the corruption, materialism … [of] ‘monopoly capitalism’', supports 'an ‘adversary culture’' and devotes themselves to educational and critical democratic activities, Chomsky contrasts this to 'technocratic and policyoriented intellectuals' whose professional identity is characterised by compliant administration of policies and the promotion of mere training (indoctrination) through technical procedures and processes. Clearly, our Union’s core values are opposed to the professional identity of technocratic intellectuals and align closely with the democratic, active orientation of value-oriented intellectuals. The latter therefore offers value for the task of developing professional identity in relation to the role of delegate. Educating the professional identity of casual academics towards developing the orientation which characterises valueoriented intellectuals seems especially urgent now in light of the fact that our exclusion from secure work, professional development and the intellectual life of the academy means casual academics – who do around 70 per cent of undergraduate teaching in Australia (Connell 2019) – are positioned by the neoliberal university towards becoming a compliant technocratic intellectual. Such a professional identity is incapable of fulfilling what Henry Giroux (2013) describes as the core responsibility of higher education to 'educate students to make authority and power politically and morally accountable'. Our Union, therefore, has a vital role to play in opening up access for all Australian casual academics to the kind of educative space created by the Victorian Division’s Professional Development program which includes casual academics together with other delegates in deliberation about, and participation in, what can be described as the shared task of professional identity of 'spreading hope back through the university sector globally' (Kenway et al. 2015) in the service of a more socially just world and the global common good.

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

Dispute at UWA

Halting wage degradation By Eileen Glynn, Raechel Smith & Sanna Peden WA Division & UWA Branch

NTEU University of Western Australia (UWA) Branch has recently lodged a formal dispute with University management in an effort to reverse the tide on the systemic degradation of wages and conditions for UWA casual staff. The dispute was lodged on the back of a 'Staff Working Conditions are Student Learning Conditions' campaign which combined the efforts of staff and students united in a commitment to improve teaching and learning standards through improved employment conditions for casuals. Back in 2013/14, a group of casual UWA NTEU members in Engineering raised the alarm about systemic underpayments as a result of the misapplication of casual pay rates. These tutors noticed their pay was lower than that of colleagues performing similar work in other faculties because their salary was calculated at 'Other Required Academic Activity' rather than 'Tutorial' rates. The definition of a 'Tutorial' in the UWA Staff Agreement refers to 'any education delivery described as a Tutorial in a course or unit outline or in an official timetable issued by the University'. After concerns were raised about these underpayments through the UWA Academic Consultative Committee the work performed by these NTEU members previously described as 'Tutorials' in unit outlines in first semester were changed to 'Other Required Academic Activity' in second semester. At the same time as the NTEU was attempting to run a campaign and dispute on this matter, the then Vice Chancellor, Professor Paul Johnson, announced the 'Renewal Plan' and his intention to radically restructure the faculties, service delivery systems and his intention to shed 300 staff. Despite a bitter series of NTEU disputes and campaigns UWA management forced through their 'Renewal Plan', shedding hundreds of staff and with them their skills, experience, expertise and organisational knowledge. Hundreds of submissions were made to University management during the Renewal Plan consultation process warning that essential systems and services would suffer if the plan was implemented. A new cohort of staff were either mapped or recruited into roles with little or no handover from previous incumbents – new members had to either sink or swim. Huge holes in staffing were filled by the hasty appointment of casuals at a time when HR and finance systems had been rendered strained and chaotic by the restructure. Early in 2019 a series of casual members from multiple faculties started raising concerns about their pay. Non-payments, late payments, payments at inappropriate rates were being reported almost on a weekly basis. Some members had difficulty assessing if they were being paid correctly as a result of confusing payslips which did not reflect accurate pay periods, pay codes and disaggregated tasks into rates not compliant with the Agreement. UWA Branch Committee Casual representative Dr Andrew Broertjes led the charge on a campaign to raise awareness with students on the plight of casuals at UWA with a 'Staff Working

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

Conditions are Student Learning Conditions' campaign. NTEU UWA Branch President, Dr Sanna Peden sent regular weekly updates to members urging them to send through evidence and to spread the word to their colleagues. The Union contacted casual members directly and reached out to as many casuals as possible with the help of the UWA Sessional Staff Association. The UWA Guild’s Pelican magazine also printed an article on casualisation on campus, which helped increase student awareness of job insecurity among their tutors and lecturers. As a result of these actions a significant range of evidence was collected, and de-identified samples were presented to management with a Notification of Dispute on 31 May 2019. The dispute details the nature of the casual academic staff underpayments and specifically proposes that the University: • Conduct an audit of the appointment of all casual academic staff from 2013 to date. • Correct the classification of all incorrectly classified casual employees presently employed. • Notify all previously employed casual academics who have been incorrectly classified. • Provide back-pay to all casual academic employees from 2013 onwards who have been underpaid. The dispute also notes that 'on the information provided to us, the occurrence of such underpayment is not confined to any location, school, or faculty, but appears to be occurring across the University'. As Connect goes to print, NTEU is awaiting formal confirmation from the University regarding their acceptance to all our proposed terms, thus reaching an acceptable and successful interim resolution to the disputed matters. A decision document of the 2016 Renewal Plan stated that the benefits of the restructure included 'increased efficiency' and 'significant financial savings'. Instead – and unsurprisingly – NTEU members regularly report that they have been instructed by the Executive to find savings as a result of a budgetary crisis. This coupled with the systemic failure revealed by the underpayment of casuals demonstrates that the Renewal Plan has failed to deliver on its strategic objectives almost completely. Many of the UWA Senior Executive staff responsible for the design and implementation of the Renewal Plan have left their roles at the University. Professor Paul Johnson (ViceChancellor), Sandra Ventre (Director of Human Resources), Paula Langley (Acting Director of Human Resources), Pranay Lodhiya (Executive Director Corporate Services) and Michael Chaney (Chancellor) have all gone. Shortly after the NTEU lodged the casual pay dispute, it was announced that Vice-Chancellor, Dawn Freshwater, would also be leaving UWA next year to take the helm at the University of Auckland. While the University undergoes this dramatic turnover of senior management, leaving incoming appointees responsible for fixing the mess left behind, the NTEU UWA Branch grows in strength. Our membership is increasing steadily, more members are stepping up as delegates and activists – and, importantly, casual members are finding and using their voice.

International Mentor Program

Signs of failure Anonymous University of Newcastle

Have you ever been on a holiday overseas and tried to negotiate your way around without being able to converse in the native language or read the local signage? Navigating your path becomes an isolating, disorienting and time-wasting process. Now imagine sitting in a university class with essentially no conversant language skills, essentially being illiterate in the native tongue. Sitting among domestic peers oblivious to your circumstances and lack of communicant ability, disadvantaged in a most unfair way. Lost in a foreign world, you withdraw and seek the companionship of likestudents, they too are frustrated that the time and money they have spent, and the opportunity they have, is being wasted before their eyes. One solution that the University of Newcastle has engineered to address this problem is the creation of an ‘International Mentor’ position among its existing student body. The selection criteria for such a mentor includes proficiency in communicating in both English and Mandarin. Such proficiency is then stated as being to enable one of their duties of translating weekly content of courses for students finding themselves in the scenario described above. Well-developed communication skills, and proficiency in communicating in English, it must be noted, is a requirement of ALL students undertaking the particular subject for which this ‘fix’ is being used. This is an implicit, but substantial, signifier of failure in the university’s duty to have adequately prepared full fee-paying international students admitted to their degree-level courses. It is also an example of students being short-changed on their educational experience, paying for something they are promised but do not get – a decent chance to excel in their chosen field of study. Having such a poor grasp of the language of instruction as to require course notes being translated does not accord with any standardised assessment of English proficiency. For example, obtaining a score of 6 via the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) (denoting a Competent User, which is commonly the base level standard for admission to undergraduate academic study in Australia) indicates that the student ‘has an effective command of the language despite some inaccuracies, inappropriate usage and misunderstandings. They can use and understand fairly complex language, particularly in familiar situations’. Nothing in this description suggests the need for translating from the language of instruction to the language of comprehension. Apart from short-changing students, this ‘solution’ to the problem increases costs (paying the International Mentor at award wages

for up to 5 hours a week for 13 weeks per semester. And where, I ask, does this funding come from?) and wastes time for the student involved, time which should have been spent becoming language-proficient before enrolment. It also dilutes the standing of university education in Australia, and the student’s own prospects, by producing a quality of student lower than that which could be achieved with adequate preparation to enable at least sufficient content comprehension, let alone academicstandard communication ability. It creates problems of equity by disqualifying the student from the benefits of immediate instruction and class involvement that others in the course enjoy and also in relation to both domestic students and other international peers who receive no such additional mentoring. And translation of course content does nothing to foster a student’s improvement of English language proficiency over the course of their studies. It is easy to discern who benefits most from such lop-sided contractual arrangements. Australia’s export revenue from education totalled over $35 billion in 2018, over 60% of which went to higher education organisations such as universities. And international students make up nearly a third of all higher education enrolments (though worth proportionately more to an organisation's bottom line than their domestic counterparts), the vast majority coming from countries in which English is not the first language. Chinese students constitute the bulk of income (over one-third), with students of Nepalese and Indian origin the fastest growth prospects. Tertiary education continues to be big business in Australia Big business, yes. High quality? No. Language problems alone provide an exemplar of the dominance of commercial expediency over academic achievement. Although the Federal Government has standards of language proficiency for allocation of immigration visas, Australian universities set their own minimum levels of competency in English for admission to their courses, with limited external oversight. Satisfactory grasp of language is demonstrated and verified by scores on tests of English proficiency such as IELTS, emphasising adequacy in reading, writing, listening and speaking skills. Requirements are usually set higher than usual visa standards due to the academic nature of study. Such requirements, however, have not precluded a host of media reports (and anecdotal discussion among academics) of international students lacking acceptable language skills. All such reports have been officially denied by respective Australian educational organisations (and representative bodies), with no acknowledgement of admitting students essentially illiterate in the English language into their courses. The signs of failure, however, are there. What to do when you’re motivated by profit over substance? Follow the example of our esteemed universities: sign students first and allow them to ask questions later (but please, go through our translator!).

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

The

'benefits' of

In April 2019, The Conversation published the now infamous Wardale et al.1 article highlighting 'the benefits of casual academics'. The article caused a backlash from casual academics across Australia, and since then several articles have been published in response. These articles bring the voices of casual academics to this discussion, a perspective that is essential to our understanding of this issue.

A Conversation about Casualisation The first direct response to the article in The Conversation was published by the Australian History Association (AHA) as a three-part set. Titled 'A Conversation about Casualisation' this set highlighted the effects of casualisation in Australian universities. The first of these articles, written by Dr André Brett2, responded that: The article reads as “how can we best exploit casualisation?” rather than “how can we resolve the crisis of casualisation?” It has asked the wrong questions and, therefore, its suggestions are unhelpful. […] it is almost unbelievable that Wardale, et al. would describe it as positive that casuals go beyond contractual obligations routinely. This is negative: people are doing work and not being paid for it. […] the authors make no attempt to interrogate the background to casualisation or to question the systems that reinforce it.

By Lina Koleilat Australian National University

The second part of the set, by Dr Joel Barnes3 criticises the problematic research methods conducted by the authors’ and highlights the hypocrisy of the use of ‘flexibility’: Instead of financial considerations, Wardale et al. focus mainly on ‘flexibility’. This item of neoliberal jargon by and large signals a gig economy paradigm that privileges the just-in-time needs of employers over the rights of employees to stable work and income. That ‘flexibility’ is in practice a managerial alibi rather than a genuine two-way street is clear from the way it is made to do too much explanatory work in the piece. […] ‘Flexibility’ is not the real explanation here; the basic fact of the cheapness of casual labour is. The third part of the response publish by AHA is a Twitter discussion between Effie Karageorgos and Imogen Wegman4 which is a compilation of responses to the infamous article. Kate Davison adds: “Relentless precarity makes me depressed.” Anne Rees: “In its attempt to be ‘balanced’, this article completely elides the violence of casualisation. The casualisation of university teaching is not a valid hiring practice associated with a mix of ‘concerns’ and ‘benefits’, but rather a system of exploitation inspired by profit-maximising logic that

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

Image: Viktor Forgacs does great harm to academics and imperils the future health of teaching and research.”

1. Enjoying perfect health because if you don’t have sick leave, you don’t get sick!

James Kirby: “This is a disturbing attempt to normalise casual labour in universities. […] The problem is that full-time jobs have dried up in Australian higher education, especially for ECRs looking for postdoctoral fellowships and entry-level lecturing positions. Universities know that ECRs need job experience and are desperate to get anything teaching related on their CVs, so they can count on their unpaid labour and world-class expertise.”

2. Not needing to apply for maternity or paternity leave because you don’t have any.

The Casualties of Academia The second direct response to The Conversation article, was published by Overland by Kate Cantrell and Kelly Palmer5, and reprinted in NTEU Advocate in July. Cantrell and Palmer highlight: To put it in perspective, only one-third of university staff have secure employment, while three in four Australian employees enjoy the benefits of secure work and entitlements. […] As a casual, you have no annual leave, no holiday leave, no research leave, no carer’s leave, no domestic violence leave, and – less critically, since you’re never unwell – no sick leave. You don’t have access to funding for conference fees or travel, or any form of professional development. There’s no remuneration for designing and re-designing teaching materials and curricula; no compensation for attending meetings, organising readings, digitalising resources, peer-reviewing articles, replying to emails, or hosting negotiations with Jenny from Payroll. Sarcastically, they highlight the usual misconception that “To be given casual work is a gift”: Instead of engaging in a serious conversation about the problems of casualisation – instead of asking why it is that casuals academics ‘aren’t going anywhere’ or why reducing reliance on a casual workforce should be a priority of university leaders – the authors fixate on casuals themselves as the problem. Instead of identifying or even acknowledging the different types of casuals who comprise the academic underclass, they heap career casuals, industry casuals, and PhD-candidate-casuals together. In doing so, the authors elide the systematic brutality that casuals experience every day. […] Finally, university management should remember who pays their bills, and every now and then it wouldn’t hurt to include with the invoice a simple thank you.

Advantages of Being a Casual Academic The third direct response is a sarcastic account by 'The Academic Precariat'. 'The Advantages of Being a Casual Academic' was published by Flood Media.6 Here is an excerpt of the 20 ‘advantages’ of being a casual academic:

6. Not stressing over the holidays about the courses you’re teaching because you don’t know what you’re teaching until a week before semester starts. 13. Flexibility! You can set your own hours for all seven of your jobs. 16. Being reassured that your unpaid labour doesn’t go unnoticed. Finally, a podcast by Vivian Pham, featuring Laura Hammersley discussing precarity in Academia will be published soon. These pieces bring together the varied perspectives and arguments from those academics that are currently working in precarious conditions. Perhaps, one step forward to engage in a respectful conversation about casualisation is for full time academics and university management staff to start with the short reading list below in order to understand the perspectives of casual academics in Australian universities. 1. 'Casual academics aren’t going anywhere, so what can universities do to ensure learning isn’t affected?', Dorothy Wardale, Julia Richardson & Yuliani Suseno, The Conversation (8 April 2019), https://theconversation. com/casual-academics-arent-going-anywhere-so-what-canuniversities-do-to-ensure-learning-isnt-affected-113567

Reading List 2. 'A Conversation About Casualisation, Part One', The Australian History Association (26 April 2019), https://ahaecr.wordpress.com/2019/04/26/aconversation-about-casualisation-part-one/ 3. 'A Conversation About Casualisation, Part Two', The Australian History Association (29 April 2019) https://ahaecr.wordpress.com/2019/04/29/aconversation-about-casualisation-part-two/ 4. 'A Conversation About Casualisation, Part Three', The Australian History Association (3 May 2019) https://ahaecr.wordpress.com/2019/05/03/aconversation-about-casualisation-part-three/ 5. 'The casualties of academia: a response to The Conversation', Overland (6 May 2019). https://overland.org.au/2019/05/the-casualties-of-academiaa-response-to-the-conversation/ 6. 'The Advantages Of Being A Casual Academic', Flood Media (9 May 2019): https://www.floodmedia.org/articles/the-advantages-of-being-a-casualacademic '"Starvation Wages": No job security for most Victorian university staff', Madeleine Heffernan, The Age (1 May 2019). https://www.theage.com. au/national/victoria/starvation-wages-majority-of-victorian-universityworkers-in-casual-teaching-trap-20190501-p51j1y.html 'The Consequences of being a "Good" Early Career Academic', Fabian Cannizzo, The Social Thinker (28 April 2019) https://thesocialthinker. wordpress.com/2019/04/28/a-good-early-career-academic/ 'The Unis where 70 per cent of workers worry about their jobs', Campus Morning Mail (02 May 2019): https://campusmorningmail.com.au/news/theunis-where-70-per-cent-of-workers-worry-about-their-jobs/

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

National Tertiary

Casuals Committee By Lina Koleilat & Elizabeth Adamczyk National Tertiary Casuals Committee

According to WGEA data, more than 42% of all staff are now casually employed (by headcount) and in some universities, those employed on casual contracts represent approximately twothirds of all staff. The NTEU National Council sought to address this crisis in our universities with the 2018 decision to establish the National Tertiary Casuals Committee (NTCC). This move further built on an important decision by the NTEU National Council in 2016 when it established specific casual representative roles on Branch Committees, as a mechanism to ensure that the voices of casual staff are heard and consulted throughout the Union. Establishing the NTCC is another important step by NTEU to give a platform to ensure the lived experience of casualisation is heard by our institutions, and to be a part of setting the agenda to inform campaigns at National, Division and Branch levels. The role of the NTCC is to establish a national campaign against casualisation and to ensure the issues around the casualisation of work in higher education are being addressed as a standing item on each Division Meeting Agenda and at National Council. The Terms of Reference of the NTCC adopted in 2019 are: • To develop and lead a national-level campaign against casualisation in Australian higher education. • To build power for casually employed staff in Australian higher education. • To provide a national collective voice to casuals (both within NTEU and in the sector), including recommendations to Divisions, National Executive and National Council. • To support, develop, fund and provide training for activities, resources and campaigns at Branch, Divisional and National level that address issues identified by casual NTEU members in Australian higher education. • To facilitate recruitment (and retention) of casual university staff to NTEU through targeted local, divisional and national campaigns, resources and activities. The NTCC has met to pool cross-institutional ideas, resources, and stories, to devise strategies and campaigns to fight against casualisation and address the systemic issues associated with casualisation that are eroding the higher education sector. We are working to understand diversity and commonalities in setting our agenda. We are also aiming to develop a National Charter around Secure Employment, to undertake audits of casual networks at Branch and Division levels, and to develop key messages around casualisation to lobby State and Federal Governments. We recognise that casualisation is not an issue solely of casual staff per se, and that issues of precarity, vulnerability, and insecurity affect all staff in different ways as the corporatising practices of the neoliberal universities play out. We also recognise that issues of casualisation intersect with other issues of equity and diversity in our workplace, such as gender or race. The NTCC is working to devise common strategies to shine a light on the economic, social, and cultural problems associated with casualisation and cohere around campaigns to re-shape working conditions in the sector. We recognise that fighting to abolish casualisation in the sector is a long game, and for as long as casualisation in higher education exists, we will work to ensure that casual staff enjoy the same rights, entitlements, and visibility as tenured staff members in our workplaces and in the higher education sector. The NTCC is a critical mechanism to not only provide feedback on pathways to address the pervasiveness of

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

casualisation (and attendant erosion of conditions and rights) at our universities, but also to ensure that we build pathways in our own Union where the voices of casual members can be heard and addressed. To quote from the report published by the NTEU University of Sydney Branch in 2017, “[i]f we insist that the University should not be above criticism, so it must also be for our own Union. We should be proud of what … the NTEU does, and what we have achieved … But we should also engage in honest evaluations of our own efforts and their limitations”. Ensuring that the NTCC continues to be a part of conversations occurring at Branch and Division level about the issues which affect casual staff members is one critical way to achieve this.

The NTCC is comprised of casually-employed staff at institutions across Australia, in Queensland, NSW, Tasmania, Victoria and WA. We are from diverse disciplinary and practical backgrounds, bound by our belief in the importance of seeking and achieving fairness, equity, and rights for staff employed in higher education. We meet every six weeks, along with NTEU National President Alison Barnes and NTEU officers Michael Evans and Lachlan Clohesy. As this important initiative develops, we encourage you to help build union power in your workplace by getting in touch with the Casual Representative at your NTEU Branch or with the Committee members in your State or Territory. unicasual.org.au/ntcc

Your NTCC Delegates Elizabeth Adamczyk (NSW) I teach and research the uneven effects of capitalist development on justice, democracy, and the environment. I am passionate to work through the NTCC and as the casual staff representative to build platforms in our workplace and our union to empower casual staff to speak out against attacks on the rights and security of workers in higher education.

Dr Andrew Broertjes (WA) I was awarded my PhD from the University of Western Australia in 2007. I have been teaching in various capacities at UWA since then, focussing mainly on global history. I am currently the casual representative on the NTEU UWA Branch Committee. In that capacity, and on the NTCC, I am hoping to continue to fight the good fight against casualisation in the tertiary sector.

Dr Tricia Daly (NSW) I am a lecturer, tutor and a casual academic representative at Macquarie University. I joined the NTCC to actively work with others to abolish systemic gender oppression, to inform university policy on sexual assault, and to remove casualisation from the workplace!

Ellyse Fenton (QLD) I have been a casually employed academic for twelve years, working as a tutor, a research assistant, and a lecturer. I am currently coordinating courses in gender studies and political theory in the School of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Queensland. I joined

the NTCC because I think casualisation is the single biggest challenge facing higher education in Australia, and the NTEU is well positioned to illuminate the social costs of a casualised academic workforce as well as organise to change employment practices.

James Harding (NSW) I am a casual activist and PhD student at the University of Sydney. I am the causal representative on the NTEU USyd Branch Committee and an active member of the Sydney University Casual Network. At USyd, and on the NTCC, I am part of the team fighting against casualisation in a broad sense, as well as against the day-today attacks on casuals across campus.

Annette Herrera (VIC) I believe members with the lived experience of being casual and who represent casual workers need to set the agenda in relation to casual workers rights and entitlements at the NTEU. By participating in the NTCC, I wanted to light a fire with our union leaders and fellow casual activists around issues important to casual workers. I have learned many lessons and felt a growing sense of solidarity with my fellow NTCC reps which has been the best part of the NTCC.

Lina Koleilat (ACT) I am a casual activist and the casual representative on the ANU NTEU Branch Committee. In my research I focus on ethnographies of protest and resistance in contemporary South Korea. As casual academics constitute a growing percentage of staff in Australian universities, I believe we need to build solidarity and work collectively to collectively fight the exploitation of casual academics – unions are a great place to start.

Nathaniel Lau (TAS) I am Student Ambassador and final year law student at the University of Tasmania. I was elected as a casual delegate to represent casual workers at the University. I signed up to the NTEU because I want to learn more about the Union's work and I want to be part of that movement to fix workplace issues. Fun fact: I'm an international student from Malaysia and in Malaysia there are no unions except white collar unions.

Zoei Sutton (WA) I am a Sociology PhD Candidate (specialising in human-animal studies) and casual academic at Flinders University. I joined the NTCC as the South Australian representative because I recognise that the challenges faced by precariously employed staff are structural and require a collective approach to effect much-needed change.

Dr Audrey Statham (VIC) I’m a casual lecturer and I research and teach critical thinking and democratic pedagogy. I spoke in support of the motion to establish the NTCC. I believe it’s a forum for casuals to develop a collective voice and exercise responsibility for combatting the shift towards greater precarity in Australian universities. We also congratulate the members of the NTCC that were part of our fight against casualisation and who have recently taken up full-time positions outside of the university sector: Nicola Gordon has been appointed to a hybrid teaching-admin role at St Aidan's Anglican Girls' School in Queensland. Nic Kimberley has been appointed as a Ministerial Advisor in the State Government of Victoria.

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

The

Flipped

classroom Pedagogical innovation or creative tutorial cuts?

The University of Melbourne likes to pride itself on being innovative. The reality is that University Management cares more about inventing new and more creative means to maximise profits at the expense of students and staff. Evidence of this is piling up like dollars in our Vice-Chancellor's pocket. The University’s new and growing craze for replacing conventional lectures and tutorials with so-called 'flipped classrooms' is one such example. Having quietly spread like a contagion to a number of schools across the university since 2017, the 'flipped classroom' is a pedagogical model with no defined basis beyond a core aspiration for creating a student-centred, active, and often technology-based learning environment (Taylor 2015; DeLozier & Rhodes 2017). Theoretically, a classroom is 'flipped' when the course coordinator shifts instructional content outside of the classroom (e.g. in the form of pre-recorded online lectures), and devotes the in-class time to discussion, problem-solving, and collaborative peer learning. Sounds appealing – only it’s far from reality.

Students suffer

By NTEU Casual and Sessional Staff Network University of Melbourne

The truth is, the pedagogical basis of the 'flipped classroom' model is highly contested in the educational literature, and empirical research has consistently pointed to the drawbacks of the model, especially when it comes to students’ learning experience and academic standards (see for instance Johnson 2013). Few students are enthused by the model at the University of Melbourne. Class sizes are often large, leading to poor staff-tostudent ratios and a diminishment of the 'human' element in teaching.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

One student in a 'flipped' class of about 50 students said: I often felt I missed out on the professional guidance and input that makes the difference in smaller, conventional tutorials… the ‘flipped classroom’ model deprives students of adequate contact with teaching staff and hinders the communication of learning materials. But it’s the most marginalised students who bear the brunt of these tutorial cuts. As another student observed: 'it was easy for those who were shy, or for whom English was a second language, to lapse into long silences and remain fairly anonymous… .' Despite having been trialled and abandoned in the Asia Institute in 2018 due to student dissatisfaction, the 'flipped classroom' is now set to be imported into the School of Physics to replace laboratory demonstrations. Sessional and casual teaching staff in the school have voiced concerns about the likelihood of the model negatively impacting the development of students’ analytical, critical thinking and research skills.

Pretext for wage theft Even if one assumed the 'flipped classroom' had pedagogical merits, its implementation from theory to practice has paved the way for exploitation. At Melbourne, the 'flipped classroom' model has provided schools a guise for cutting tutorials to save costs. In the School of Historical and Philosophical Studies (SHAPS) and the Asia Institute (AI), for example, 'flipped' classes have collapsed the traditional lecture-plus-tutorial model into a single 2 hour or 2.5 hour seminar, during which the subject coordinator and a tutor are both present to facilitate the class. Neither the teaching/learning content nor the tutor’s role differs drastically from those in a traditional setting. But instead of paying tutors properly, management has invented new 'job categories' beyond the terms set in the Enterprise Agreement to justify cuts to tutorial rates.

In SHAPS, tutors teaching a 2 hour 'flipped class' are only paid full tutors’ rates for the initial hour, while the second hour is paid at one third of the full rate, and half the 'repeat tutorial' rate', under the category of 'Other Academic Activities.' It gets worse. In AI, tutors were classified as 'Assistant' in their contract for a flipped class – even though they were contracted to mark students’ assignments, and paid for only 1 hour of 'Other Academic Activities' for teaching a 2.5 hour seminar of over 50 students. This is despite the fact that most 'flipped classroom' tutors perform the same amount of, if not more, work than they would have in a normal class setting. How does the University justify such blatant wage theft? In a leaked email between one school manager and a subject coordinator, management justifies the pay cut by claiming that the tutor won’t be actively leading the class the whole time, so it’s technically just one hour of 'active teaching.' Wait, does this mean that there's such a thing as 'passive teaching' or 'half teaching?' Is it not the case that, even in a normal tutorial setting, the tutor is supposed to be shifting between observing, listening to, and facilitating small and large group activities and is therefore rarely 100% 'active' the whole time? Three bemused NTEU casual members raised these questions at a recent university workshop promoting the 'flipped classroom' model, only to provoke embarrassment when no one could answer the questions. The University’s strange obsession with the 'flipped classroom' model in the face of growing staff and student opposition is the latest expression of its ongoing corporatisation. The university is realising its desire for budgetary savings through tutorial cuts, exploiting an already heavily casualised workforce and compromising the quality of education – all under the fanciful banner of pedagogical innovation. Real education and innovation, however, will not happen until the university starts putting people before profit. Image: Igor Zakharevich/123rf

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

Ethics and whistleblowing

A student 'evaluation' dismissal By John Price

My story is about the misuse of student 'evaluations' (also referred to as student satisfaction surveys) in the hiring of casual academics at the University of Queensland (UQ). I was mistreated by the University but was able to take them to the Education Ombudsman for redress. The action I took was to draw attention to unethical practices in the use of Student Evaluation of Courses and Teaching (SECaTs) by the University. My story starts way back in 1986 when I graduated from the University of Queensland with an honours degree in Architecture. After graduation my lecturers asked me to return to assist with tutorials. I maintained this casual teaching employment at UQ for a number of years and I enjoyed returning to give something back as I worked on my professional career and established my practice. When the school suggested that I obtain student evaluations of my teaching (SECaTs) I agreed. At the time the system was voluntary and the results were not used for the administrative assessment of teaching performance. I felt student evaluations might be a useful way to gain feedback and assess what was working well in my teaching. I handed the feedback surveys to students and the students returned them at the end of the session. When I received the survey results I was pleased to find out that they liked the teaching experience and gave me, what I now know are, fairly exceptional scores for a course in my field. In 2015 I undertook a teaching role in which I devised, taught and administered a project based course for twenty-five third-year students. I was not advised that SECaTs had moved online and were now automatically offered to students. The SECaT results from this course were very uneven as if there was a divisive person or event at play. I had been invited to tutor for the following semester but in January I received an email from the Head of School saying my SECaT score for the previous semester was below the numerical minimum benchmark that had been set and that I would not be re-engaged. I protested that my SECaTs prior to semester 2, 2015 had been quite different and provided the full reports including the score details and written comments. To my surprise, the Head of School seized on only the negative comments and refused to appoint me for teaching that semester. For reasons I won’t go into here, my complaint made it to the University of Queensland’s Integrity and Investigations Unit (IIU). After six months I received a finding which upheld the refusal of my appointment and which found the use of SECaT reports to justify my appointment refusal to be 'not unreasonable'.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

The IIU even supported the notion that selected individual negative comments, which had been anonymously made, could safely and accurately represent my teaching work. I never got to discuss the totality of the SECaT report or make a comparison with my earlier excellent one, so it felt to me like an injustice. After a significant amount of fruitless correspondence with the University, I decided to take the matter to the Queensland Education Ombudsman which was the prescribed next step in the UQ complaints system. This required a well-made para-legal case and I would not have been able to continue without generous pro bono expert assistance from a UQ Alumni lawyer. After some months, the Ombudsman found that while it was 'reasonable' to use SECaTs as 'one measure' in employment decisions, 'it would be unwise to use such evaluations as the sole measure' and that if such material was used it should be from all the years that a tutor was employed not a single semester. Furthermore, the Ombudsman found that SECaTs could be skewed by small cohorts of students and that tutors should be given the opportunity to explain the circumstances of responses before action was taken. After the Ombudsman found that I had been unfairly treated and was 'denied natural justice,' I entered into further discussions with the University to attempt to seek a resolution and closure. The University was not prepared even to meet with me. The only result was that the Ombudsman’s finding would be placed on my personnel file. In all of this I was fortunate to have a very privileged position. My teaching work was me giving up my time as an act of professional service, anyway. I wasn’t working toward a career or an appointment in academia and I had an established architecture practice. I was also fortunate to have Alumni friends who felt strongly that their University has been on a questionable path and who were willing to help me with the skills needed to make a clear case and I was supported by my union, the NTEU. It took that mix to challenge the situation – and with a rather modest outcome! Without actually facing career risk, I‘ve been shown what the precariat is like and how really tough it is to choose to make an issue of ethics and to be a whistleblower. John Price was an NTEU member at UQ.

A casual tutor's story

International and insecure By Sadaf Javadian

I came to Australia in 2016 to study for my masters. As all of you know, studying here costs a lot for international students. Without the help of my parents, who supported me financially, this would have never been possible. We all thought this was going to be an investment for the future, that I would get a quality education and if I study hard I will get a job that would return this money and more into my life. I studied hard, of course, despite all the difficulties, but two years after graduation finding a job has become nothing but a dream for me. Some of the main reasons why this has happened: 1. Low quality of education which doesn't prepare students for the workplace (reasons include overworked academic staff, very large classes, little one-on-one support, vague and useless feedback on assignments). 2. Little to no support for students after graduation to help them get a job. 3. Regulations in Australia which make getting a job very difficult if you are not a permanent residence or citizen. Even if you have a valid visa with full work rights, like I do now.

This meant that if I had 10 tutorials during semester, I had to mark papers for 10 hours and not get paid for it. This was how I got paid in most of my subjects. In my fourth semester as a tutor, in an NTEU casual meeting, I found out that this marking for free thing is actually illegal! I couldn't believe it, so some of the NTEU members showed me the law and then I was convinced. I followed up this matter and tried to gather evidence from emails and the University website. I talked to my colleagues about it and they had no idea as well. I tried to bring awareness about this illegal action that was happening in plain sight and, as a result, I lost my job. Without any explanation or notice, my supervisors stopped answering my emails. I didn't receive any new contracts this semester. I was devastated. I sent an email to the coordinator and asked why suddenly after two years of teaching, with such high student results, I didn't receive one subject? His answer was 'I don't know!' After studying at the University of Melbourne since 2016, and working here for two years, no one could tell me why my contract was not renewed this semester. Where is the dignity in this work? Why am I treated with so little respect? I actually had a supervisor tell me that tutoring was 'a nothing job.'

These problems force international students like me to take casual and insecure jobs. This in return makes it very difficult to apply for permanent residency, even if your skills are in high demand in Australia.

I can't accept what happened to me and move on, because it wasn't fair. And because it will probably happen again to someone else. Another international student working here as a tutor. Another woman that tutors in the evening that does not have access to the building.

I was a tutor from the second year of my masters. I love teaching and I was good at it. I also had many years of teaching experience prior to this. My students' feedback speak for my performance in my two years as a tutor.

I am speaking out to help others find the courage to speak up and speak out. Things must change and I will not stay silent. I won't stay silent because I am union and we are stronger together.

I received very little training for this job. I had no idea how to claim my salary because nobody explains these things to you. I had to mark student papers in the joint library where some of my students were studying at the same time, because I had no where to work. As a tutor you have so many duties but no dedicated place to perform them. I didn't have access to my department's main building after hours for meetings with my supervisors or to pick up teaching material before workshops, which were usually after hours. I had to call someone who was inside to open the door for me. When I requested access, they said casual staff don't need such access!

Casuals, sessionals, tutors should not stay silent. Staff who hire casuals and sessionals must not stay silent if they know tutors are underpaid. The rules are broken at this University. Students and tutors deserve better than this. Sadaf Javadian was an NTEU member and Delegate at the University of Melbourne.

I cared about the students because I understood their problems. I tried hard to teach them things the University of Melbourne failed to teach me. They came to me after class to get advice and I always spent extra time with them. Of course I was not paid for these consultations; I was hardly paid for the hours I was putting in. When you become a tutor, the University doesn't help you set up even the most basic stuff, like claiming your income. But they did explain upfront the three hour rule for workshops/tutorials. This three hours of work included, one hour of preparation before class (which was never enough), 1 hour of teaching itself and 1 hour of marking after class.

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

The 2013 Enterprise Bargaining campaign secured an important victory for casual academic staff at the University of Newcastle (UON), when the provision on ‘the UON Academy’ (hereafter, ‘the Academy’) was included in the 2014 UON Academic staff Enterprise Agreement.

The UON Academy Rationalising casualisation

The clause spells out that: The University will establish the UON Academy … to provide a systematic approach to the recruitment, induction, professional development, performance management and recognition of casual academic staff. It aims to ensure consistent employment practices, provide dedicated HR support and be a conduit for effective communication with and between casual academic staff. The University will provide casual academic staff with access to professional development and training activities and opportunities.1 Installation of The Academy since 2014 has been overseen by its self-declared ‘champions’ in senior executives at UON, the Director of People and Workforce Strategy, and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Academic). Parallel to this occurring, these two champions published an article advocating for “using workforce strategy to address academic casualisation”.2 Their article suggested the need for a purposive mechanism able to “engage, support and effectively manage” casual staff, an “often neglected cohort of the academic workforce” traditionally “on the margins of institutional life”.3 This recognition has great potential. Indeed, since 2014 casual staff have been repeatedly reminded that The Academy continues to “engage, support and recognise the key role that sessional academic staff play in the delivery of world-class education”4 and furthermore, that casual staff “are key to the transformation of our University’s education”.5

By Elizabeth Adamczyk University of Newcastle

Yet, aside from the problematic ambiguities of the language used (for example, why and what does it mean for casual staff to be critical of a ‘world class education’ or indeed an ‘education transformation’), I wondered how the promises in the Enterprise Agreement clause are being actioned. How does The Academy ensure that casual staff at UON are being ‘engaged’, ‘supported’, or ‘recognised’? Moreover, who defines what it is for a casual academic to be ‘engaged’, ‘supported’, and ‘recognised’?

Exploring The Academy With scant email communications around The Academy, I look to its website. Here, the conditions laid out in the clause above have been achieved in part by providing training activities and resources to develop personal, teaching and professional skills useful for academic teaching. Another impressive means through which The Academy works for casual staff is in recognising their achievements. From 2016, The Academy has given Awards to celebrate the outstanding contributions of casual academic staff—an important tool to make casual staff feel valued. At the 2018 Academy awards, the champions (including our new DVC–A champion) also reminded us that The Academy is achieving great things. One of these ‘great things’ is that The Academy offers “a community for sessional academic staff” (the nametag that I received at The Academy awards says so). I set out to explore said community further.

A conduit for communication My first port of call was The Academy LinkedIn Group which “provides a centralised hub for all information relating to sessional academic staff”.6 Sounds promising. At the page I “find links to interesting articles, resources, toolkits, events as well as colleague achievements, University news and announcements”.7 Given that the page states that “[t]he views expressed by this group are not necessarily those of the University of Newcastle”,8 I was encouraged that this group seems an opportunity to engage in a free and open dialogue with other casual staff.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

However, a glimpse of the group admin shows the LinkedIn page is managed by no less than five HR staff from the University. The obvious question arises, why appoint only people who are not casual staff members to manage this forum of the casualised workforce? Also, why are professional staff from an HR department—who may not possess the lived experience of being a casually– employed academic—appointed to oversee the conditions in which this group connects and engages in dialogue? It left me wondering, is this the “conduit for effective communication” with and between casual staff that was committed to in The Academy Clause of the 2014 Enterprise Agreement? If HR remains the gatekeepers of this communication conduit, just who does ‘The Academy’ serve?

Dedicated HR support Still searching for the promise of support and recognition, I return to The Academy website. Here, I learn that all casual staff are entitled to long service leave (LSL) after serving ten years. This seems exciting news. Yet, when a colleague eligible for LSL found it had not appeared in their HR system to claim, they visited The Academy website which suggested if LSL was not visible, to email HR. Upon emailing HR, they were advised that casual staff are not able to see their LSL, to access and claim their entitlement by completing a self-administered timesheet. Instead, HR would manage their claim for them. In this moment, I am reminded that casual staff exist in a system where they do not enjoy the same status nor dignity of work of permanent employees. Is the privilege of accessing long service leave entitlements part of the “dedicated HR support” committed to in The Academy Clause of the 2014 Enterprise Agreement?

Governing The Academy As a clause of the Enterprise Agreement about casual staff, surely the formal governance of The Academy engages with casual staff, for example, by actively working with casual staff to transform their working conditions and entitlements. But a steering committee of casually-employed staff to work with senior executive to not only champion The Academy, but to advise on its agenda and remit, is thus far un-realised. Perhaps I am mistaken to take the absence of casual staff in the governance of The Academy as suggestive of silencing the voice of casual academic staff. As we were reminded in the first UON Academy news of 2018, “the UON Academy has made a significant contribution in improving the sessional academic staff experience. We know this through positive feedback from the latest Your Voice sessional staff survey” (emphasis added).9 Then again, without including casually-employed staff in directing responses to the problems of casualisation at UON, The Academy seems to exist not to empower casual staff and give them a voice, but to silence their agency. In doing so, it acts to further isolate already marginalised staff.

A paradigm Then again, what the champions might gain by excluding the voices of casual staff from the story of success of The Academy is clear. It enables casual staff to be conceptualised in the ‘transformation’ of ‘world class education’ UON according to a neoliberalising agenda, simply treating casual staff as a cost. It also silences any counter narrative to those reducible to the economic bottom line or wealth extraction, for example, that the casual staff at a university are a group comprised of diverse individuals with claim to respect, equity, and rights. The story of The Academy has been tooled as a ‘case study’ of successfully managing increased levels of casualisation at conferences around the world. In 2016 for example, The Academy received an award from the Australian Higher Education Association suggesting that The Academy represents ‘best practice’ in “excellence in people and culture”.10 In 2017, the champions of The Academy presented at the International Labour Relations

Conference to “share the story of the UON Academy and its establishment as a strategic priority at UON”.11 Within the context that increased casualisation is occurring in universities across the westernised capitalist world, the story of The Academy is also being shared as a tool by which university management might strategically manage the labour of a casualised workforce. In 2018 for example, the champions of The Academy took what they referred to as “the bold step to bring together teams from human resources, teaching and learning, and academic and professional staff at other Australian universities for a forum on supporting sessional academic staff”. And while the selfdeclared ‘bold’ move “enable[d] UON Academy to work with, and learn from, other universities by sharing experiences, strategies and initiatives”12 for managing a precarious workforce, casual academics were notably absent from the event. Are these activities of The Academy offering a conduit for casual staff as claimed in the EA? Or has the absence of a real casual voice in the workings of The Academy simply enabled it to be instrumentalised and mobilised as a strategic tool to support the organisational thrust towards an ever-growing insecurelyemployed segment of the higher education workforce?

Empowering casual staff or rationalising casualisation at UON? The Academy has been successful in setting out practical means to support casual staff, for example, by suggesting pathways for training and development (albeit many relevant to all staff, as well as some specific only to casual staff), and annually awarding success in casual teaching. The broader ideological issue is, does the presence of an Academy that purportedly 'supports' and 'values' casual staff paper over the disconcerting issues of high levels of casualisation in higher education? The Academy acts an institutionalised mechanism to entrench and enable casualisation, using tools that silence casual staff. It rationalises management choices at UON to actively promote casualisation in academia, both within and outside the institution. And awarding precarious work ensures casual staff themselves enthusiastically re-enact managerial rhetoric on the necessity of casualisation. We need not be silent. We need to resist corrosive rhetorics of managerial instruments like The Academy and collectively fight for an ethical model of higher education devoid of casualisation and its destructive affects. I am a casual academic and a member of the NTEU University of Newcastle Branch Committee. I write these stories on the unceded lands of the Awabakal people. The views are my own, and not necessarily those of others at UON, the NTEU National Tertiary Casuals Committee, or the NTEU UON Branch Committee.

References 1. Fair Work Commission. (2014). The University of Newcastle Academic Staff Enterprise Agreement. Commonwealth of Australia. Canberra. p. 32. 2. Crawford, T & Germov, J. (2015). Using workforce strategy to address academic casualisation. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. 37:5. pp. 534-44. 3. Ibid, p. 354. 4. The UON Academy, 5. The University of Newcastle. (2019). UON Academy: 2018 Highlights. University of Newcastle: Callaghan. p. 1. 6. LinkedIn. UON Academy. (online). https://www.linkedin.com/ groups/7048826/ 7. Ibid. 8. Ibid. 9. The University of Newcastle. (2018). UON Academy News: #1, March 2018. (online). http://hr.cmail20.com/t/ViewEmail/j/3F6E083C3BF1E99D2540EF 23F30FEDED/063116392B7F2913EBAD456BEB5F1DD6 10. The University of Newcastle. (2017). UON Academy News: #1, May 2017. (online). http://hr.cmail20.com/t/ViewEmail/j/607D237162120E44/0CBAE1 89C509C60A40EE66FE10287772 11. The University of Newcastle. (2018). 12. ATEM/Campus Review. (2016). Best Practice Awards Winners & Highly Commended 2016. (online). https://www.atem.org.au/communications?c ommand=article&id=1580&message_id=124

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

Lessons from the

Chemist Warehouse

strike By Lauren Kelly National Union of Workers

In March of this year, hundreds of Chemist Warehouse distribution centre workers went on strike across Victoria and Queensland. At the heart of our campaign was a challenge to the business model of precarity—a system which saw workers waiting on a daily text message to confirm tomorrow’s shift, or worse, to confirm unpaid standby for an indeterminate period of time. Before the strike, around 70% of workers were employed as labour hire casuals with only 30% holding permanent jobs—the inverse of typical causal to permanent ratios in warehouses. This is a system whereby the ‘host’ Chemist Warehouse can outsource the employment relationship to a third party and successfully shift risk and responsibility away from their billion-dollar enterprise and onto the individual. For workers this means insecure work and no basic protections such as unfair dismissal. Workers don’t need to be formally fired, they simply stop getting texts. Many endured this employment relationship for years on end. Even for those with permanent positions, wages paid by Chemist Warehouse were 25 per cent lower than industry standards. Widespread precarity gave rise to a culture of bullying, intimidation and sexual harassment. The National Union of Workers (NUW) heard countless stories of this nature. At the most extreme end of this power imbalance, we heard from women who were sexually assaulted and others who were coerced into relationships with male managers on the promise of more regular shifts. In this environment many felt unable to individually challenge the company for fear of losing their jobs. Such fears were well-founded. That was before the strike.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

Rather than accept precarity as inexorable or immutable, workers came together to challenge the business model of precarity which governed their lives. They did it for their families, their workmates and for their own futures. Within a few years these warehouses went from non-union sites, to workplaces where union members were in the majority and promoting a culture of sticking up for each other. Even so, workers knew the company would not meet their demands without struggle. Following protracted negotiations and a groundswell of community support, workers voted to take protected industrial action and endorsed an indefinite strike. It took seventeen days to bring one of the wealthiest companies in this country to their knees. Supplies ran low in stores and community supporters shopped elsewhere. Workers won wage increases between 18.75 and 22.5 per cent over four years, with an immediate pay rise of 8.75 per cent for all workers. In a direct challenge to the business model of precarity, all labour hire casuals who went on strike walked back through the gates with permanent jobs. Casuals who didn’t take part in the strike, and new casual recruits moving forward, now have the ability to convert to permanent positions after six months. Further, management agreed to undergo gendered violence training to begin the process of cultural change within the company. For Rebecca, a casual delegate during the strike who won a permanent job, taking action has changed the workplace. “We are all more confident after the strike, and solidarity has really cemented. Even though I have a permanent job now,” she explains, “I still have that don’t-mess-with-me attitude. As a delegate and an OHS representative, I know my presence is felt by management. The casual conversion clause makes it easy to bring any new casuals into the Union, and we have regular training to remind us and teach others what we fought for and what we won. Complacency is non-existent now.”

The bond between Chemist Warehouse delegates and workers remains unbreakable and was the backbone of the strike’s success. Workers understood that precarity is an attempt to undermine solidarity and collective action, and they rejected this by going on strike together. Permanent workers walked off the job to demand secure jobs for all as a matter of core union business. Men proudly stood up, not for women who had experienced sexual harassment, but with them. It was one struggle, one fight—and that’s why they won. Of course the business model of precarity is familiar to many, with 40 per cent of Australian workers now concentrated in insecure work. This includes our NTEU comrades, working in some of the most profitable universities in the world and contributing to one of Australia’s most important exports — higher education. In what former NTEU Victorian Division Secretary Colin Long has declared a 'national disgrace', university casualisation continues to rise. For casual academics enduring zero hour contracts, unpaid overtime and disrespect, what insights can be gleaned from the struggles of Chemist Warehouse workers? When asked, Rebecca puts it plainly: I don’t see any way forward other than a national strike. The permanent and casual workers must back each other in and get angry. It doesn’t matter if you’ve got a university degree or you’re a picker and packer in a warehouse, management is always the same. They treat workers as beneath them and will always try to squeeze more out of you without rewarding your hard efforts. “Don’t forget,” Rebecca adds, “we hold all the power. We are the ones who can bring it all to a halt.” Image: Striking Chemist Warehouse workers (courtesy NUW)

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

Thanks to the successful lobbying by former NTEU Victorian President, Nic Kimberley, Victoria’s public universities have published data which shows that less than one in three people working at Victorian universities in 2018 had a secure job.

Insecure

employment

In 2019 Victoria’s public universities were, for the first time, requested to publish data in their Annual reports on the number of people they employed as casual and on limited term contracts. As readers might or might not be aware, to date universities have only been required to report data on the full time equivalent (FTE) level of casual employment, and therefore the number of casual employees in higher education has been subject to conjecture .

the reality for

2 out of 3

The data on the number of employees with insecure employment shows Victoria’s public universities employed a total of 71,901 people in 2018, of which over two thirds, 49,076 people or 68.3% were employed either on limited term contacts or as casuals. Put more starkly, fewer than one in three (31.7%) or 22,825 people employed by Victoria’s public universities in 2018 had secure ongoing jobs.

Victorian university employees

Melbourne and Monash were not only the largest employers with 17,361 and 15,823 total employees overall, they also had the greatest proportion of employees with insecure employment with almost three quarters (72.9% and 72.5% respectively as shown in Figure 1) of their employees being on casual and limited term contracts. At the other end of the spectrum is Federation University which not only had the least number of employees (1,520) but was very much an outliner when it came to the proportion of employees with insecure jobs at 31.7%. It was the only university where less than half of all employees were employed insecurely.

27.

Melb

Swin

Victoria

37.9%

1.7

RMIT

ER 3 % L M & C A S UA

.7% 31

FUA

G N

ONG OI 3

35.8%

33.1%

La Trobe

29. 7

By Paul Kniest Policy & Research Coordinator

27.

Monash %

LI M IT E D

Deakin

33.0 %

Figure 1: Proportion of total number (headcount) of employees with ongoing and number limited term/casual contracts in Victorian Figure 1: Proportion of total (headcount) of employees with ongoing and limited term/casual universities. contracts in Victorian universities.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

VU STAFFING Female share

Age

All staff

Under 35

ALL POSITIONS

57.3% INSECURE POSITIONS

57%

38% INSECURE POSITIONS

48%

Executive staff

36â&#x20AC;&#x201C;55

ALL POSITIONS

41.2% INSECURE POSITIONS

44.1%

43% INSECURE POSITIONS

36%

Non-Executive staff

Over 55

ALL POSITIONS

57.5% INSECURE POSITIONS

57%

19% INSECURE POSITIONS

16%

Table 1: Gender Age breakdowns for Secure and Insecure Table 1:and Gender and Age breakdowns for Secure and Insecure employment atUniversity Victoria University 2018 employment at Victoria 2018

Universities were not asked to publish data on the number of casual and the number of limited term employees separately, although Victoria University did so. The data was, as shown in Table 1, reported for executive and non-executive employees as well as by gender and by age. While women accounted for well over half of all employees (57.3%) in 2018, they were grossly underrepresented amongst the executive accounting for only 41.2% of these positions.

favoured form of employment amongst management personnel, accounting for more than eight out of ten (83%) of all employees. The publication of data on the number of employees is not only very important to show the heavy reliance that our universities make of insecure employment but it can also be very helpful in understanding who it affects and where such forms are utilised within universities. Better data on the number and composition of insecurely employed staff not only gives us greater insights into who our casual or limited term contract employees are, but also how the reliance on this type of work might be undermining the core teaching and research activities of our universities.

Amongst executives women are, however, overrepresented for those with insecure positions (44.1%) when compared to those with secure positions (38.6%). In term of non-executive jobs, the proportion of females with insecure positions broadly reflects their share of the total employment (about 57%). In terms of age, it is perhaps not surprising that there is a higher proportion of insecure employment amongst younger employees, with almost half (48%) of all insecurely employed people aged 35 or below compared to only about one in five (18%) of employees with secure ongoing jobs.

The NTEU will continue to advocate for the publication of data on the number of employees on a similar basis as provided by Victoria University.

33%

ONG OI

All VU

VET

% 17

Management

SU % AL

G N

Professional

40%

Academic

As noted above, Victoria University did provide a more detailed breakdown of their data which is summarised in Figure 2. The data shows that of the 67% of employees with insecure employment, 57% were casuals and 10% had limited term contracts. We would expect this mix to vary between universities, with the more research intensive universities (Melbourne and Monash, for example) likely to have a relatively higher proportion of limited term employees given limited term contracts are the preferred form of employment for research only staff.

While the published data is extremely helpful in demonstrating the extensive use of insecure forms of employment, it lacks the detail necessary to understand where casual and fixed term employment occurs within each institution.

Figure 2 also shows differences in the mix of employment ED contracts between different types of work. While four in ten (40%) C TER of general/professional employees had a secure job this falls to M about one in four academic (26%) and vocational education and training (VET, 28%) employees. Casual employees account for two Figure 2: Victorian University: Share of Staffing numbers thirds of employees in both these areas where its extensively used (headcount) by Types of Work and Contract of Employment 2018 for the delivery of teaching. Limited term contracts are by far the Figure 2: Victorian University: Share of Staffing numbers (headcount) by Types of Work and Contract of Employment 2018

read online at www.unicasual.org.au

NATIONAL TERTIARY EDUCATION UNION

Delegate Profile

Delegates

Victoria Fielding

What do you enjoy most about being a Delegate? I enjoy representing casuals on the Branch Committee and consulting with my colleagues about problems in their working lives that need to be addressed. It has been a great learning experience for me to join the Branch and be mentored by other Delegates in how to bring about positive change for UniSA staff.

What are some of the challenges you face as a Delegate?

Why did you become a Delegate?

I am a PhD student, I work as a casual tutor The biggest challenge I have faced as a and I am the casual Delegate for the NTEU's Delegate is to make myself visible and to University of South Australia (UniSA) reach out to as many casual staff members D E L E G AT E S . N T E U. O R G . AU Branch. I became a Delegate because I as possible so I can better represent their wanted to support my colleagues to improve their working needs in the Branch. UniSA is a very large organisation. The conditions. I am a strong believer in the benefits of collective nature of casual tutoring work means that I donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t interact action in a workplace. with other tutors outside of the small team teaching the same course. Every time I speak to a casual staff member about their When staff feel they have some say over their working lives, experience of work, I learn something new and get a different some power to negotiate, they feel a perspective on their needs; I just wish I stronger sense of worth at work, they feel could speak to more of them. more valued, and also have a stronger trust in their colleagues and managers. What would you say to others who I have previously worked at UniSA in a full-time ongoing professional role, and so it was quite an eye-opening experience to work as a casual with the inevitable insecurity and lack of benefits associated with this work. The university sector is increasingly reliant on casual academics, and so I wanted to represent casual staff so we can work together to make sure our working conditions are as fair and reasonable as they can be.

might want to become Delegates? I would strongly encourage NTEU members to become Branch Delegates. There is a great sense of purpose in the Branch, a sense of camaraderie and a satisfaction in delivering excellent outcomes for UniSA staff. Universities are great places to work, and we want to keep it that way. I encourage you to become a Delegate to represent your colleagues to make a positive difference in your workplace.

find out more at delegates.nteu.org.au Since 1958, the Australian Universitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Review has been encouraging debate and discussion about issues in higher education and its contribution to Australian public life.

NTEU members are entitled to receive a free subscription on an opt-in basis. If you are an NTEU member and would like to receive your own copy of AUR (either hard copy or digitally), please edit the Publication Preferences in your Member Record at nteu.org.au/members Or send an email to aur@nteu.org.au

www.aur.org.au

AUR is published twice a year by the NTEU.

Connect // Volume 12, no. 2

Semester 2, 2019

 I want to join NTEU  I am currently a member & wish to update my details PLEASE COMPLETE ALL SECTIONS. Information on this form is needed for aspects of NTEU’s work. Privacy statement: nteu.org.au/privacy

MEMBERSHIP FORM FOR CASUAL/SESSIONAL STAFF ONLY A YOUR PERSONAL DETAILS

B YOUR EMPLOYMENT DETAILS

TITLE

INSTITUTION/EMPLOYER

|SURNAME

GIVEN NAMES

CAMPUS

HOME ADDRESS

FACULTY/COLLEGE

|STATE | MALE

SUBURB

DATE OF BIRTH

|POSTCODE

DEPT/SCHOOL MAIL CODE/BLDG CODE

 FEMALE  NON-BINARY

INCL ROOM NO.

WORK PHONE

POSITION

INCL AREA CODE

MOBILE PHONE

CLASSIFICATION LEVEL

OR HOME PHONE

EG: LECTB, HEW4

|YOUR EMPLOYMENT GROUP

WORK EMAIL

  RESEARCH ONLY  OTHER: __________________________ GENERAL/PROFESSIONAL STAFF

OTHER EMAIL ARE YOU AUSTRALIAN ABORIGINAL OR TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER?

 YES

USE MY HOME ADDRESS FOR ALL MAILING

HAVE YOU PREVIOUSLY BEEN AN NTEU MEMBER?  YES. AT WHICH INSTITUTION?

C YOUR SALARY RANGE & MEMBERSHIP FEES MEMBERSHIP FEES by PAYMENT FREQUENCY Monthly Quarterly Half-Yearly Annually

PLEASE INDICATE YOUR ANNUAL SALARY RANGE: YOUR SALARY RANGE DETERMINES YOUR MEMBERSHIP FEES

 Under $20,000  $20,000 – less than $30,000  $30,000 – less than $50,000  $50,000 or more D PAYMENT METHOD

$8.67

$26

$52

$104

ALL SMALL PRINT IS REPRODUCED AT NTEU.ORG.AU/JOIN/SMALL_PRINT

$39

$78

$156

FOR ASSISTANCE IN COMPLETING THIS FORM, PLEASE CALL 03 9254 1910

$52

$104

$208

$21.67

$65

$130

$260

You may resign by email (national@nteu.org.au) or by written notice to your Division or Branch Secretary. Where you cease to be an eligible member, resignation shall take effect on the date the notice is received or on the day specified in your notice, whichever is later. In any other case, you must give at least two weeks notice.

CHOOSE ONE ONLY Processed on the 15th of the month or following working day

| NAME |&BRANCH ADDRESS

FINANCIAL INSTITUTION

— — —

|ACCT NO.

 MONTHLY  QUARTERLY  HALF-YEARLY  ANNUALLY

ACCOUNT NAME

|DATE

SIGNATURE

2 CREDIT CARD NAME ON CARD CARD NO.

— — — —

SIGNATURE

E MEMBERSHIP DECLARATION

5% DISCOUNT FOR ANNUAL DIRECT DEBIT

| MASTERCARD  VISA | EXPIRY — — / — — |DATE

DATE

email to:

I hereby authorise the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) APCA User ID No.062604 to arrange for funds to be debited from my/our account at the financial institution identified and in accordance with the terms described in the Direct Debit Request (DDR) Service Agreement. Full text of DDR at www.nteu.org.au/ddr

Processed on the 16th of the month or following working day

 MONTHLY  QUARTERLY  HALF-YEARLY  ANNUALLY

I hereby authorise the Merchant to debit my Card account with the amount and at intervals specified above and in the event of any change in the charges for these goods/services to alter the amount from the appropriate date in accordance with such change. This authority shall stand, in respect of the above specified Card and in respect of any Card issued to me in renewal or replacement thereof, until I notify the Merchant in writing of its cancellation. Standing Authority for Recurrent Periodic Payment by Credit Card.

F SEND TO NTEU

PLEASE SIGN & DATE

I HEREBY APPLY FOR MEMBERSHIP OF NTEU, ANY BRANCH & ANY ASSOCIATED BODY ESTABLISHED AT MY WORKPLACE SIGNATURE

Office use only: Membership no.

$13

1 DIRECT DEBIT

— — —

Members are required to pay dues and levies as set by the Union from time to time in accordance with NTEU Rules. Further information on financial obligations, including a copy of the NTEU Rules, is available from your Branch or at www.nteu.org.au/rules.

$17.33

I INSERT YOUR NAME BSB

 ACADEMIC STAFF  TEACHING & RESEARCH  RESEARCH ONLY  TEACHING INTENSIVE

national@nteu.org.au

or post to: NTEU National Office PO Box 1323, Sth Melbourne VIC 3205

JOIN ONLINE AT

NTEU.ORG.AU/

JOIN

National Tertiary Education Union, National Office, PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Australia ph 03 9254 1910 • fax 03 9254 1915 email national@nteu.org.au • www.nteu.org.au

All NTEU members are automatically covered for journey injury insurance. You could be paying hundreds of dollars to get this valuable cover, but as a financial member of NTEU, it’s absolutely free!

Travel Work insurance Travel Toto Work Insurance

More info at nteu.org.au/traveltowork

Are you ready to jump into a new car? A new car could be one of the biggest purchases you make, and there is so much to consider. If you need help, or just need a place to start, check out what Private Fleet Australia’s leading car buying service has to offer via your NTEU Member Advantage website.

Save on your next international payment! OFX provide fast fee free transfers^ at lower rates that the banks for all NTEU members, potentially saving you thousands. Register for free with no obligation and enjoy: • Competitive exchanges rates • 24/7 access to a dedicated OFX Dealer by phone and online access • And much more

To find out more about your benefits, visit: www.memberadvantage.com.au/NTEU

For more information, email info@memberadvantage.com.au or call 1300 853 352. ^Terms and conditions apply

Start your journey with a lower rate Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve discounted our New, Used and Green Car Loan rates by 3%.

Green Car Loan For environmentally friendly cars

5.29 p.a. 5.50 p.a. %

Promotional Variable Rate

Comparison Rate1

Call 1300 654 822 Visit bankfirst.com.au Interest Rates effective 3 June 2019 and subject to change. Check website for current rate. Promotional interest rates available for car loan applications received by 30 June 2020 and funded by 31 July 2020. The 3% discount is off the standard car loan rate. We reserve the right to amend or withdraw these offers at any time. 1. Comparison rate calculated on a secured loan amount of $30,000 for a term of 5 years. WARNING: This comparison rate is true only for the example given and may not include all fees and charges. Different terms, fees and other loan amounts might result in a different comparison rate. Fees and charges apply. Terms and Conditions available upon request. CANSTAR award 2018. Victoria Teachers Limited ABN 44 087 651 769, AFSL/Australian Credit Licence Number 240 960.

Love UniSuper? Your family can too!

Weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re passionate about helping our members save for an exceptional retirement. And now your family can join our award-winning* fund too. A UniSuper Personal Account offers your family great value for money with a range of investment options, low fees, excellent service, competitive insurance premiums and a national financial advice team. See whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s to love at unisuper.com.au/personal.

Prepared by UniSuper Management Pty Ltd (ABN 91 006 961 799, AFSL 235907) on behalf of UniSuper Limited (ABN 54 006 027 121, AFSL 492806) the trustee of UniSuper (ABN 91 385 943 850). This information is of a general nature only. Before making any decision in relation to your UniSuper membership, you should consider your personal circumstances, the relevant product disclosure statement for your membership category and whether to consult a qualified financial adviser. *SuperRatings awarded UniSuper 2019 Fund of the Year. Visit unisuper.com.au/awards for more information.