NTEU Media Release: RMIT University staff oppose management overkill on behaviour standards
Professional and academic staff at RMIT University have come out strongly against a complex, ambiguous and patronising code of behavioural standards which will compromise academic freedom.
“The Union doesn’t have a problem with university staff being expected to abide by professional standards, including diligently performing their work,” said Dr Colin Long, Victorian Secretary of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU).
“But what RMIT University management is proposing goes far beyond that. It is managerialism gone mad and will not tackle any of the major difficulties experienced by staff at the institution.”
“Universities are supposed to be robust sites of intellectual inquiry. You don’t maintain a healthy collegial environment where people feel free to challenge ideas and question assumed truths by making everything subservient to ‘team goals’ and enforcing a positive attitude.”
The 12 page code, known as ‘Behavioural Capability Framework’ was devised by external consultants and will be applied to all staff as part of their work plans and performance appraisals.
It includes a large number of complex, overlapping and ambiguous behaviour standards, including a commitment to “passion”, staff being “resolute”, showing “enthusiasm” and displaying a “positive rather than negative” attitude.
“It is not exactly telling staff to sing the lyrics to ‘Don’t Worry be Happy’ but it is close.”
“Jokes aside, staff believe the Framework breaches their collective agreement and institutionalises excessive workloads and under resourcing by framing these as challenges staff are expected to deal with.”
If RMIT believes it has a morale problem NTEU would suggest the fault lies not with staff outlook or lack of behavioural standards, but in the very real workforce problems facing the institution.”
“These include unsustainable workloads, the second highest density of casual academic labour of any university in Australia, one of the highest all student to all staff ratios in the country, and a slow grind of staff cut backs over the last few years.”
“If the institution wants to earn the respect of its staff, it could start by addressing some of these real problems, not by wasting money on hiring external consultants to tell staff much of what they are already doing,” Dr Long concluded.
For more information and comment:
Dr Colin Long, NTEU Victorian Secretary: 0403 920 361
Andrew Nette, NTEU Media Officer: 0431 217 131
Comments
[ +1 ] I agree that a positive or realistic and open attitude to life (including work, work relationships etc) does have its merits. However here I think what is being asked of staff is something different altogether. I think it is asking staff to be enthusiastic, positive and co-operative whether something needs challenging or not. This flies in the face of what universities are about and is at odds with the very nature of their employment and job description. I suppose it depends how important we think intellectual inquiry, ground-breaking research and challenging of the status quo is in our society. If we don't think it is that important then the 'Behavioral Capacity Framework' should be applied to all universities. :-)
Like • Dislike •[ +1 ] When I read the article about RMIT in The Age (“So happy together” 3/4/2012) I thought it sounded like the times when people said, “Bullying problem in schools? Hey, just teach kids to be more resilient!"
Like • Dislike •But resilience alone doesn't solve the problem. We have to provide decent, safe, ethical schools where adults take responsibility for guiding kids AND ALSO teach them about resilience so they can handle life's normal ups and downs.
This sensible two way approach is what we need in our workplaces—which is where we spend a third of our lives—rather than a blaming mentality where staff are told to brighten up and think positively while the leaders prioritize profit over quality and human rights.
I think this is a classic example of throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
There are huge benefits to educating people about good mental health and the elements of positive psychology. Used in a respectful way, positive psychology encourages leaders to provide happier, healthier work environments and teaches people practical ways to change their mood, or discipline their kids, or handle stress when it comes along.
Most people realise this doesn't mean we should use the positive psychology approach as a bandaid for all the things we know harm our health and happiness at work (such as over-the-top cost cutting, disrespect, lack of work/life balance, condescension, disloyalty and lack of recognition for people’s contributions).
Don't slam positive psychology—it is the key to helping ordinary people understand what’s likely to make them feel calmer, more productive and less anxious, and yes, even happier when they go to work, or when they are with their families and live in our community.
[ +3 ] Such behaviour standards as those proposed by RMIT are another case of managerialism gone mad. In some circumstances the apparently universally desired standards are the opposite to what one might actually expect or hope for. Just two examples - No 1: should one really be passionate about something in a research project rather than calm and objective?? Eg no 2: if one is developing an argument either in research or teaching that is critical of something or other, especially in a political or social context, it may be expected that the basic orientation is negative rather than positive. To be prescriptive about these things is utter madness.
Like • Dislike •However, just as university managements seem to increasing regard students as customers in a shop, they also seem to increasingly view academics and professional staff as shop assistants, who should always be smiling and courteous in the way they dispose themselves to the customers. The silly people who invented this nonsense have nevertheless done one good thing - they have given Don Watson more material with which he can ridicule the inane language of managerialism.
Chris Coney
[ +6 ] Perhaps students can rate us on those smily faces scales, 1 = Grumpy, to 5 = Polyanna.
Like • Dislike •