Letter to Heads of Schools
9 June 2004
Dear
As an NTEU member you will be aware that our general meeting of 13 May passed a resolution (unanimously at St Lucia, Gatton and Ipswich) to conduct a sustained campaign to alter the UQ Financial Allocation model. It is our view that the current internal distribution model is exacerbating the problems caused by the erosion in Commonwealth funding over the last several years, leading to increased stress on staff in the Faculties and other units, and contributing to the destructive cycles of restructuring across the University, which have cost numerous jobs in recent years. This year, with several faculties and numerous Schools running operating deficits, and significant restructurings currently under way in the EPSA Faculty, the situation is particularly acute, despite the University of Queensland being one of the main beneficiaries of recent higher education funding changes (changes to Commonwealth Grants Scheme, additional places for Queensland, and, from 2005, HECS-Plus increases of 25%).
The UQ NTEU Branch will be forming a working party to co-ordinate this campaign soon. I have already been asking questions and pressing management on this issue at Senate, and lobbying will continue at Senate level. We also intend to conduct a campaign both within the university and publicly, through the media.
I am writing to members who have responsibilities as Heads of School or other organizational units to inform them of this campaign and to encourage them to make use of the opportunities available to them to lobby for changes to the current internal funding model. The SDVC, Paul Greenfield, has foreshadowed, in meetings of Academic Board and Senate, that there will be a process of reviewing the way in which the University budget is constructed from July this year. It is important that Heads of School and others with budgetary responsibilities make their views heard in this process.
So far, management have argued that the cause of our budgetary difficulties has been external to the University, particularly the inadequate indexation of Commonwealth grants, and that internal changes to allocation methods will only provide “second-order relief”. We do not disagree with the analysis of the shortfalls in public funding, but we take the view that many Schools and units within the University are in urgent need of even “second-order relief”.
So far, management have indicated a willingness to review the current method of charging overheads, so that University overheads are charged more widely than is currently the case, so that they do not fall as heavily on teaching and research elements. There are other measures that need to be examined, however, which include:
- The extent to which money is taken “off the top” by the centre. Revenues are heavily taxed to support various “strategic funds”. The extent to which the University has aggressively followed a strategy of “leveraging” external funding has resulted in gaining significant funds for high-profile projects, but the cost to the rest of the University, which has had to match this funding, has been high.
- Current projections suggest that the benefits to Schools of the 25% HECS-Plus increases will be more modest than some may have anticipated. Unfortunately, the relevant Senate resolution was framed very broadly, in terms of “improving the student experience”, with the result that it can be interpreted as authorizing the diversion of a significant proportion of this new funding to the centre. It is our view that as much of this additional funding as possible should go to the level of the School or unit that is actually delivering academic programmes. There would be a strong and justified expectation among students and their families that this should be the case. It is also nonsensical to talk about improving staff-student ratios until we have stopped cutting staff numbers, which requires helping Schools to eliminate deficits and avoid restructures.
The current University funding allocation formula is making the jobs of Heads of Schools and organizational units more onerous than it needs to be, as well as increasing stress on staff and creating the constant threat of job losses. In my view, the interests of the NTEU and of Heads of School coincide on this issue, and I look forward to your support in the current campaign.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew Bonnell
Branch President, NTEU UQ