Advocate, March 2020

Advocate VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020 ◆ ISSN 1329-7295

COVID-19 effect on uni staff

Higher ed funding drought

Privatisation of public education

Waging war on wage theft

A&TSI staffing slowdown

State of the Uni survey results

CLIMATE EMERGENCY

ACADEMIC FREEDOM

NTEU bushfire relief

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS

What’s up with academic freedom?

Our Voice: At Work & Beyond

Climate change & the Australian dream

A Human Rights Framework

In/Visibility on campus

Scholars at Risk

UniSuper divestment

Gerd says thank you!

Religious freedom bills give freedom to discriminate

Children & climate change

Who’s out at work?

Love UniSuper?

Your family can too!

We’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, flexible insurance and a national financial advice team.

See what’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.

Chant West named UniSuper 2019 Fund of the Year. Visit unisuper.com.au/awards for more information.

In this edition 2

Scorched summer reminds us: climate change is union business

24 Scientists' warning ignored for decades

Dr Alison Barnes, National President

3

Ian Lowe, Environment writer

From the General Secretary

33 OK, Boomers – step up!

Matthew McGowan, General Secretary

Jeannie Rea, Immediate Past President

NEWS 4

COVID-19 exposes sector’s vulnerability

5

Round 7 enterprise bargaining complete!

6

Waging war against wage theft in higher education

7

Adding up wage theft in Maths & Stats

8

Babies, breastfeeding and bargaining

Bushfire risks & rights

9

Merry Christmas and a No, No, No!

Inger Mewburn, The Thesis Whisperer

46 Liberals’ digital ascendancy Pat Wright, ICT writer

49 Farewell from over the Ditch Sharn Riggs, TEU (NZ)

28 Safe as Houses: Climate change & the Australian Dream

30 Unions must declare a climate emergency What is a 'climate emergency'? Why does declaring one matter? And what does it have to do with unions?

32 Stop supercharging climate change

12 Screening The Final Quarter across Qld

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS

13 Invasion Day rallies call for real recognition

35 QUTE Conference 2020: Our Voice @ Work & Beyond

14 A&TSI staffing data signals a slowdown

38 In/Visibility on campus

15 It gets a little bit lonelier each week...

40 Who's out at work?

18 Gerd case not over yet

What it means to be out at work and what employers can do to make workplaces positive experiences for all workers.

Proposed codes to protect free speech need to also protect academic freedom.

20 Free and equal NTEU’s submission to the AHRC’s proposal for a national Human Rights Framework.

22 Scholars at risk Scholars at Risk is an international network protecting and promoting academic freedom.

The Coalition's Religious Freedom Bills give churches the freedom to discriminate.

PRIVATISATION 44 The surreptitious infiltration of private interests in public education Pearson Education Australia at the University of Newcastle.

28

DELEGATES 47 Kate Mattingly, UniSA 48 Sylvia Klonaris, CDU MY UNION 50 Casual/sessional fee increase delayed due to coronavirus

CLIMATE EMERGENCY

Qld Division goes solar & funds APHEDA

25 Bushfires spark green shoots of solidarity

51 Upcoming Friday Sessions for members

26 Children, bushfire & climate change

52 New NTEU staff

How we can teach kids about the changing climate, and how they are teaching us.

22

42 Faith no more

Gerd thanks his supporters

19 Where are we at with academic freedom?

13

Sexuality & Gender Diversity @ WSU.

Adjusting the age for retirement and superannuation access for A&TSI workers.

ACADEMIC FREEDOM

8

The scale and ferocity of the bushfire crisis were an unkind reminder of the dimensions of ecological change we now face.

WERTE!

16 Government must end the higher education funding drought

4

34 Working late, weekends and poolside

10 2019 State of the Uni survey

FUNDING

Cover image: Alison Barnes and Damien Cahill with kids at the Student Strike for Climate, Sydney, September 2019.

N Clark.

COLUMNISTS

35

Updating your membership details

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

1

◆ EDITORIAL

ADVOCATE

ISSN 1321-8476

All text & images ©NTEU 2020 unless otherwise stated

Publisher Matthew McGowan Editor Alison Barnes Production Manager Paul Clifton Editorial Assistance Anastasia Kotaidis Published by National Tertiary Education Union ABN 38 579 396 344

PO Box 1323, South Melbourne VIC 3205 Australia Feedback & advertising advocate@nteu.org.au

Dr Alison Barnes, National President Envelope-Square abarnes@nteu.org.au

M @alisonbarnes25

Scorched summer reminds us: climate change is union business As the ash settles on the smoke-soaked Australian summer of 2019–20, it’s worth taking stock of what happened and what it means for our communities, our sector, and our union. We were all affected in some way by the bushfire crisis that engulfed Australia. Whether it was our families, homes, holidays, workplaces, wildlife or Australian society – we all have a story about how the bushfires affected us.

NTEU NATIONAL EXECUTIVE National President Alison Barnes General Secretary Matthew McGowan National Assistant Secretary Gabe Gooding Vice-President (Academic) Vice-President (General Staff) A&TSI Policy Committee Chair

Andrew Bonnell Cathy Rojas Shane Motlap

National Executive: Steve Adams, Nikola Balnave, Damien Cahill, Vince Caughley, Cathy Day, Jonathan Hallett, Andrea Lamont-Mills, Virginia Mansel Lees, Michael McNally, Kelvin Michael, Catherine Moore, Rajeev Sharma, Melissa Slee, Ron Slee, Michael Thomson, Nick Warner

Advocate is available online free as a PDF and an e-book at nteu.org.au/advocate NTEU members may opt for ‘soft delivery’ of Advocate (email notification rather than printed version) at nteu.org.au/soft_delivery In accordance with NTEU policy to reduce our impact on the natural environment, Advocate is printed using vegetable based inks with alcohol free printing initiatives on FSC certified paper under ISO 14001 Environmental Certification.

Environment ISO 14001 2

The plastic bags used for postage of Advocate to home addresses are 100% biodegradable.

For me, it was a summer defined by apprehension for our climate and for my family: my mother lives by herself in a house separated from a national park by a fire trail; my daughter and her classmates spent their lunch times in classrooms, unable to play outside due to the heat and hazardous air quality; most distressingly of all, I worried about my brother and his children (particularly my severely disabled niece) who twice had to evacuate not knowing if their house would survive.

As our union works on our priorities for 2020, some members may think that although climate change is an important issue, it is one largely beyond our remit.

I can understand that view. After all, we have a big agenda already, with important workplace and sector campaigns that we need to win: growing our membership and building grass roots participation; making employment more secure; boosting federal funding; safeguarding our workplace; enshrining academic freedom and integrity – the list goes on.

Those issues will certainly continue to form the core of our work. But we would be remiss as an organisation if we had no plan to use our expertise and our power to push for action on the climate crisis that is bearing down on us.

As a union we are well placed to both lead the debate and the campaign on climate change. Our approach is evidence-based: we check our facts, we read the footnotes, and we examine the evidence before reaching our conclusions. Our members produce the climate science, track the economic modelling, research the technological solutions, and teach the

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

students who will be living with the impacts of climate change for years to come.

We know – because our expert members in climate science have been telling us for some time – that the burning of fossil fuels makes climate change worse, supercharging extreme weather events like bushfires. We know that we are currently on-track for runaway climate change that threatens human life and the natural world on a catastrophic and irreversible scale. This message was echoed recently when more than 440 scientists and academics signed an open letter to Prime Minister Scott Morrison calling for action on climate change and bushfires.

We teach our students to think critically when constructing their arguments: to examine the evidence, to explore the literature. But seeing Senator Jim Molan declare recently on ABCTV Q&A, ‘I’m not relying on evidence,’ I’m forced to conclude that some Government members are indeed living in a post-truth universe.

The fact is that our Government is hopelessly unwilling and incapable of responding with the urgency and reason that this crisis demands. We need to change that – and our union is one of the best placed in Australia to help lead the way.

NTEU National Council in 2019 directed our union to develop a comprehensive climate justice campaign, and we have commenced this work. If you’ve got ideas about what we should be doing, or you want to put your hand up to be active in this space, please get in touch with me or your branch and let’s work out how we can all play a role. ◆ Alison Barnes, National President

FROM THE GENERAL SECRETARY ◆

Matthew McGowan, General Secretary Envelope-Square mmcgowan@nteu.org.au

M @NTEUNational

Virus to test our economy & social fabric The new decade has started with a bang. The fires over summer significantly changed the debate on climate change in our country, and left many communities devastated and fearful for their futures. Young people are rightly furious and angry at what they see is a generational failure to take steps to protect their future and the future of our planet.

The NTEU community responded by offering grants to members impacted by the fires, and by stepping up the Union’s demands to UniSuper to divest from investments harmful to the environment.

Effect of coronavirus With the start of the university year, just as we thought things were settling to a new normal, COVID-19 (coronavirus) hit.

The tertiary education sector was impacted immediately and profoundly.

We know that the damage to our sector could be severe, and the impact may spread much further than university budgets. The political debate is focussed on whether universities have become too dependent on the overseas students.

The problems may get worse.

Right now, the concern is about students who come from China because that is where the pandemic originated, and it is where the majority of people affected are residing. It happens to also be the country where the most overseas students studying in Australia originate from.

The management of the coronavirus is a test of more than a country’s health system – it is a test of the strength of civil society. As US-based journalist, Anand Giridharadas tweeted 'Coronavirus makes clear what has been true all along. Your health is as safe as the worst-insured, worst cared for person in your society. It will be decided by the height of the floor, not the ceiling.' And our education system is a critical part of raising that floor.

Equality of access to care will need to be matched by equal access to information and education. The management of the pandemic will depend on an educated population with strong social policy, and the solutions to this crisis will be found in medical research and the sciences.

'Your health is as safe as the worstinsured, worst cared for person in your society. It will be decided by the height of the floor, not the

Australian universities have a range of countries they recruit students from, but by far the majority are from China and India. When the disease also spreads to Nepal, Malaysia, Indonesia and other parts of South East Asia, Africa, will there be further consequences for our student income?

That issue is dealt with further in this publication (see p. 4), but suffice to say, the failure to provide proper baseline funding by successive Governments impacts both our domestic and international students. Our higher education system should be world class for all students, and should be celebrated, supported, funded and protected – and the failure to do so by Government is now on show for all to see.

ceiling.'

All care The focus for our educational institutions at the moment is students, particularly those from China. Universities have been quick to find money to support students struggling to get to Australia. These students have lost money on flights, accommodation, and living expenses and they are still struggling to get into the country. Their concerns are reasonable and understandable, not least because university reputations rest on the student experience.

In a crisis, finding ways to support those who are vulnerable should be encouraged, whether they are from China, India, Malaysia, Indonesia or London or Australia. Their families that have sacrificed to give their children a quality education.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Their economic harm is real and should be acknowledged.

No responsibility We also want to see the same levels of concern extended to the workers in the higher education. In our sector, the most vulnerable are those approximately 90,000 casual staff who are paid day by day and week by week for their efforts.

Many of these people are finding their work drying up, and consequentially their incomes. They also have accommodation costs and living expenses. They have families and commitments that don’t disappear just because a virus has appeared.

We should not begrudge the people who are students when the universities offer to support them financially in the time of need, even if the motivation is less altruistic than they might imply. While some have explicitly made efforts to limit the harm to casual staff members, many universities have been unwilling to consider providing support for those people who perform casual work and who are often equally vulnerable and are dependent upon the university for their income.

NTEU has written to each Australian university seeking support for these staff with very mixed responses. We have also written to the Minister for Education, Dan Tehan, calling for a support package for the sector. No response has been forthcoming so far.

We agree with the call by ACTU Secretary, Sally McManus, for support for those who don’t have access to sick leave, and might go to work when they shouldn’t because they fear the loss of income. This is not just about their welfare, it is also about the health of the people they will come into contact with. ◆ Matthew McGowan, General Secretary

3

◆ NEWS

COVID-19 exposes sector’s vulnerability While protecting human health and public safety is the primary concern of authorities in Australia and all over the world in dealing with COVID-19 (coronavirus), it has exposed how reliant the Australian tertiary education sector has become on international student income.

committed to offering students their courses online (notwithstanding the incredible difficulties of having to deal with China’s heavily restricted internet access).

Many workers in both the public and private tertiary education sectors are having to deal with the potential of lost work and income without a real safety net.

This has serious implications for the workloads of both academic staff in preparing courses, and professional staff in administering courses and enrolments in particular.

The Union has also urged universities to properly support those staff, both academic and professional, who have been directed to move teaching to 'online only' delivery in the event that in-person teaching on campus is suspended or deferred.

At the time of writing (28 February), Universities Australia estimated that up to 100,000 Chinese students were unable to come to Australia to begin the 2020 academic year, with no indication of when the Morrison Government’s travel ban (a week-by-week proposition) will be lifted.

The implications for casual academic staff are even more horrendous, with the prospect of little to no work if the travel ban continues and there simply aren’t any classes to teach.

If the ban continues for any significant time, Australian universities could potentially suffer a multi-billion hit to revenue this year. The Group of Eight (Go8) universities have the most Chinese students enrolled, and are therefore the most exposed. Fortunately they tend to be the most wealthy universities, and are generally in a better position to weather such a crisis. Monash University has delayed the start of the first semester by four weeks and the University of Sydney has extended enrolments until 31 March.

But it isn’t only Go8 universities that are affected – the University of Canberra has invited international students who cannot get to Australia to defer their studies for first semester, while the University of Newcastle is one of several universities

4

Casual staff adversely affected

NTEU has delayed a scheduled increase to our casual membership fees to relieve members suffering loss of income (see p.

50). The Union is currently considering further financial relief options.

We are seeking a commitment from universities that casual staff will not suffer reduced income in the event of deferred semesters, cut shifts and closed campuses. NTEU National President Alison Barnes said 'We’ve written to Vice-Chancellors asking them to agree that those casual staff who would normally be working from day one of semester will not be worse off as a result of timetable changes due to coronavirus... Many of our casual academic members have not had work since well before Christmas. The prospect of cut shifts due to disrupted teaching timetables will mean they can’t pay their bills and put food on the table.'

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Public funding cuts The reliance on international student income by the public tertiary education sector has been largely driven by longterm cuts to government funding, with more than $7 billion worth of cuts to university funding over the last decade, and billions more taken out of the Vocational Education and Training (VET) sector.

In research published in the latest issue of the NTEU's academic refereed journal, Australian Universities’ Review ('What will follow the international student boom?'

AUR, vol. 62, no.1, 2020, pp. 18-25), RMIT University's Angel Calderon details the dramatic changes in the mix of domestic and international students and the consequent revenue streams: 'The number of student enrolments in Australian higher education has increased from 441,074 in 1989 to 1.56 million in 2018. Over this period, domestic student enrolments have seen an annual average growth of 3.4% compared to 11.9% for international students…

NEWS ◆

Round 7 enterprise bargaining complete!

At the conclusion of bargaining for the academic Agreement at the University of New England, Round 7 higher education bargaining is officially over!

With a few Agreements still to be approved by the Fair Work Commission, every higher education worker employed in Australia in a public university is set to be covered by an NTEU-negotiated Round 7 Enterprise Agreement in the next few months.

Thanks to everyone involved A huge thank you to all those who volunteered their time and energy to participate in bargaining teams across the country, to all of those who shaped the process thorough their participation in local branch meetings, and every member who stood up to be counted when it was needed by taking part in industrial action campaigns that secured the conditions your colleagues rely on.

What have we won?

Some of the headline achievements include 17% superannuation for fixedterm staff, improvements to job security provisions, improved pathways to more secure employment for casual and fixed-term staff, and improvements to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment targets, all while retaining the strong conditions and rights that higher education workers in Australia expect and deserve.

While the hard work of bargaining is over for now, the next job is ensuring the new conditions are implemented and the existing ones enforced. If

you’re not already, we encourage you to get involved in your local branch and see how you can help achieve these important goals.

Watch this space to find out what changes you should be seeing as Round 7 achievements are implemented and what you can do to ensure our hard-fought conditions are enforced. ◆ Campbell Smith, National Industrial Officer Above: Newcastle members stop work, August 2018. N Clark.

Below: UC strike, March 2019. Lachlan Clohesy

Without you, we wouldn’t have been able to achieve the great conditions secured in Round 7 Enterprise Agreements.

COVID-19 exposes sector's vulnerability cont... …In recent years, international student enrolments have underwritten the growth seen in Australian universities…

Dr Barnes said that the 'creation of such a package would reassure the sector and consolidate confidence.'

…In 1995, Commonwealth government grants totalled $4.3 billion increasing to $17.2 billion by 2017; by comparison, the income generated by international students increased from $441.2 million in 1995 to $7.5 billion in 2017.'

Private higher education providers are likely to also suffer, with recent media reports that the sector could incur losses of up to $1.2 billion if Chinese students cannot come to Australia this year.

National President Dr Alison Barnes wrote to Dan Tehan, the Minister for Education, in February asking for the Government to create a ‘Coronavirus Support Package’ for the tertiary education sector, to only be used if the current situation is prolonged and continues to deteriorate.

Say No to Racism We also asked Vice-Chancellors to consider a joint communications campaign with a strong anti-racism message, following instances of racist behaviour towards Chinese students on some campuses. An anti-racism poster and social

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

media campaign is also happening with the NUS and CAPA. Encouragingly, many vice-chancellors have replied and while they are non-committal about casual staff, they are generally positive about working with the Union around protecting the working rights and health and safety of university staff. Contact your local NTEU Branch for further details. ◆ Michael Evans, National Organiser (Media & Engagement) Read Angel Calderon's full paper at www.aur.org.au/current/blog

5

◆ NEWS

Waging war against wage theft in higher ed After settling a $2 million underpayment case involving 83 academics at the Academy of Information Technology (AIT) last year, NTEU's fight against wage theft in the sector has grown.

Two recent campaigns backed by the NTEU alongside casual staff at Macquarie University and the University of Sydney have focused on wage theft of casual staff which has resulted from the universities manipulating and violating their respective Enterprise Agreements.

Non-compliance at USyd A broader campaign to address insecure work at the University of Sydney was catalysed by NTEU concerns about university non-compliance with the current Enterprise Agreement, particularly in recovering unpaid entitlements for casual staff.

In the NTEU’s August survey of casual USyd staff, many of the 700 respondents indicated that they had not received up to 4 hours of pay for familiarisation with university policies and procedures.

Momentum was built towards recruiting new members as well as getting existing members more active, and 44 backpay claims were finalised in November. Claimants were advised before the Christmas period that payments would be imminent, but nearly 2 months later, the University continues to delay this.

Accordingly, the NTEU’s casual staff membership at USyd grew by 10%.

Branch Organiser, Rhianna Keen, said that the campaign was 'one of the most rewarding things I’ve done as an organiser. I’ve worked as a casual academic myself and I know how difficult it is. It’s been a privilege to be part of the solution to casual exploitation'.

Responsibility now lies with the university to pay the 44 claimants. Meanwhile, the insecure work campaign continues at USyd, with 17 new backpay claims for unit coordinators.

6

Survey reveals wage theft at Macquarie At Macquarie University, management were caught subverting the terms of the Enterprise Agreement which classifies payments for class types.

Staff in the Department of Mathematics and Statistics were being paid at the lower rate prescribed for demonstration classes despite continuing to deliver tutorial classes, according to a majority of responses to a faculty-wide NTEU survey.

In a first for Australian universities, the dispute filed in April 2019 was resolved through interest-based bargaining. It was based on the NTEU’s broader concerns over the reclassification rather than individual claims.

Human resources staff, the NTEU and members were involved in the proceedings, which heard that casual staff wellbeing and course quality were greatly impacted. Over $50,000 in backpay was settled, alongside a joint union-management commitment to monitor and review academic processes across other faculties.

NTEU NSW Division President, Nikki Balnave, notes that 'casual wage theft is widespread across our sector. The re-badging of tutorials… is but one example. The NTEU will continue to fight against such injustice and for the right of members to be appropriately recognised and rewarded for their work'.

Wage theft a focus for NTEU It is the ongoing purpose of the Union movement to shine a light on the pervasiveness of wage theft and strengthen the collective position of workers – casual and permanent.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Above all, the Federal Government has dismally failed to protect workers’ existing rights and create progressive workplace laws. The Government-backed proposal to (conditionally) criminalise wage theft is unlikely to prompt meaningful change while their anti-union Ensuring Integrity bill is also set to be revived.

As the NTEU increases its focus on casual staff for future campaigns, awareness is crucial. University employees are strongest together, especially when empowered with knowledge about the standards they deserve and are entitled to in the workplace. ◆ Olivia Freund, Union Summer intern, NSW Division Follow our wage theft cases at nteu.org.au/wagetheft

NEWS ◆

Adding up wage theft in Maths & Stats In July 2019, NTEU casual delegates in the School of Mathematics and Statistics at Melbourne University initiated a discussion with the casual tutor cohort in the School about the pay classification of their teaching duties. From an old School email, it had been discovered that teaching in Maths and Stats had been relabelled from ‘tutorial’ to ‘practice class’ in 2008. By the email’s own admission, however, the teaching in the classes themselves did not change.

Sadly, the change of title had been used simply to justify paying tutors in Maths and Stats a lower rate of pay to other Schools and Faculties in the University.

As awareness of this misclassification of tutoring work spread, more and more tutors felt disappointed at the devaluation of their teaching contribution. They knew that their efforts in teaching was equal to that of their peers in other Schools and Faculties. Many tutors who worked both in the School and elsewhere were puzzled as to why the same duties were being paid significantly more for the same work in other Faculties.

After raising awareness of the misclassification issue through conversations with their co-workers, the NTEU delegates, with the support of a casual NTEU organiser, arranged an NTEU workplace meeting for casual staff in Maths and Stats. The meeting’s purpose was to decide democratically: how would casuals respond? Those present discussed and debated, finally voting unanimously to pursue proper classification of their teaching work: payment of the same tutorial rate as other tutors at the University. In this, they had the full support of their casual colleagues in other Schools and Faculties, organised through the NTEU Casuals Network.

Following the meeting, the Head of School for Maths and Stats sent an email to casual tutors via a tutor manager in an attempt to justify the pay rate and placate the concerns circulating amongst staff in the School. The email clearly showed that the Head of School’s concept of how tutoring work is performed was a far cry from the actual work done.

Hours payable:

Practice Class

Tutorial

Difference in Hours 401 836 1474 110 600 156 276 228 924 396 936 744 312 120 96 24 24 192 432 432 240 192 672 360 432 288 228 120

Linear Algebra (summer) Linear Algebra S1 S2 Stats (summer) Stats S2 Engineering (summer) Engineering S1 S2 Calculus 1 S1 S2 Calculus 2 S1 S2 Accelerated S1 S2 Intro to Maths S1 Foundation Maths S1 S2 Experimental Design S1 S2 Data Analysis S1 Biomedicine S1 S2 Probability S1 S2 Real Analysis S1 S2 Vector Calculus S1 S2 0

1000

2000

3000

4000

Underpayment $19,849.50 $41,382 $72,963 $5,445 $29,700 $7,722 $13,662 $11,286 $45,738 $19,602 $46,332 $36,828 $15,444 $5,940 $4,752 $1,188 $1,188 $9,504 $21,384 $21,384 $11,880 $9,504 $33,264 $17,820 $21,384 $14,256 $11,286 $5,940

5000

Fig. 1: Difference in hours – and subsequent underpayments –for Maths & Stats tutorials relabelled as practice classes (for academic year 2019) Tutors were not passive presences in the room, as suggested, who merely waited to be asked questions by students, but active members of staff who planned lessons, solved problems with students, rendered lecture content accessible, and fielded further questions from students who were still confused – in other words, tutoring work.

Mathematics and Statistics casuals present at the HR meetings gave persuasive first hand accounts of working as casual tutors. For the first time, casual tutors were able to talk directly to University management about their work and the issues related to the way their work had been misclassified and underpaid by the School since 2008.

Tutors expressed considerable frustration at the content of this email. Yet, the Head of School refused to meet the local Maths and Stats representative delegates to discuss the issue with a supportive NTEU organiser present.

Following this meeting, University HR conceded: the work casual tutors had been performing since 2008 was not sufficiently different from a tutorial as to warrant a lower level of pay – a great victory for the organising in the School of Mathematics and Statistics! Consequently the University has expressed its commitment to pay the tutors the full rolled-up tutorial rate from 2020 and will be in discussions with NTEU members about back pay arrangements for those who have been historically underpaid. ◆

NTEU subsequently lodged a dispute with the University about the School’s practices. Meanwhile, at the CasualS Network, members had voted to pursue a ‘Big Bargaining’ strategy with the University’s HR negotiators. This meant a rejection of opaque negotiations behind closed doors between union staff and HR, but a large group of casuals’ representatives at the table, those with real experience of what the work is like. If the Head of School would not hear casual voices, the NTEU Casuals Network would make sure University HR would!

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Ben Kunkler, Campaigns & Communications Officer, Victorian Division

7

◆ NEWS

Bushfire risks & rights The recent bushfire crisis generated some obvious Work Health and Safety issues for members including extreme heat and poor air quality across many regions and major capital cities.

The potential for long term effects of breathing in toxic smoke is a real concern for all but for those with underlying conditions making them particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of contaminated air, including asthma, this is a serious immediate threat. For workers in the fire zone there are also concerns around asbestos, toxic burnt materials such as cladding, extreme fatigue, stress, and potentially post-traumatic stress disorder.

NTEU’s advice is that if you are faced with working in what you believe to be hazardous conditions you should contact your local Health and Safety Representative to report the issue and, most importantly, make a record.

You should also contact your local NTEU Branch staff who can provide you with site specific advice.

Most NTEU negotiated collective agreements contain provisions for leave to assist with emergency services or responses but many are very strictly defined and don’t cover the situation where the person is volunteering in a community organised capacity. The scale of this year’s bushfire crisis, and the likelihood that we will see more extreme events as climate change accelerates, means that we may need to look to extending our rights in this respect and also consider the possibility of other forms of emergency leave for those who are impacted by natural disasters and emergencies. ◆ Gabe Gooding, National Assistant Secretary

8

Babies, breastfeeding and bargaining ANU member Kate Buscombe made history last year during Enterprise Bargaining negotiations for the ANU Student Associations, becoming the first NTEU bargaining team member to breastfeed during a bargaining meeting (or at least the first that we’ve heard of – we’re open to other claimants of this record coming forward!).

leave will be extended from 10 days to 15 days. There is an increase in paid leave for those experiencing family and intimate partner violence from 10 days to 15 days, and the explicit inclusion of menstruation, menopause, fertility treatment and gender transition as valid reasons for personal leave. In addition to all of these important equity measures, there is also provision for flextime and other arrangements to allow people to work more flexibly, taking into account responsibilities outside of the workplace.

Kate brought baby Joe into the world 15 months ago. As he was about 7 months old when bargaining began, Joe can also potentially lay claim to being the youngest ever member of a bargaining team.

In addition to these improvements, the new Agreement explicitly includes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (A&TSI) staff for the first time. The Student Associations will aim to provide employment opportunities to A&TSI staff to achieve a workforce which is reflective of the Australian population, and will also provide additional leave for staff with religious or cultural responsibilities. This is an important and overdue step, and one we're proud to deliver.

We asked Kate why she felt it was important to be a part of bargaining, despite being on parental leave, and why she decided to bring Joe along. She said: 'It was important to me to be involved in the bargaining process to have direct input in to the development of the new EA, particularly when it comes to protecting conditions of working parents and protecting conditions which promote a healthy work-life balance for all staff.

It was also important to me to be a living example of the ongoing and valuable contributions that breastfeeding mothers make to the workplace. With the incredible support of my union, I felt confident and comfortable participating in the bargaining process – and proud to show Joe the important work that our unions do.'

Joe’s presence may have helped in the negotiations too! Bargaining concluded recently, and staff have voted to accept a new Agreement which has a large focus on equity. We've managed to secure improvements to leave conditions across the board. Paid parental leave will be extended from 20 weeks to 21 weeks, and paid partner

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Congratulations to Kate and Joe, on both the great example you’ve set for other breastfeeding parents and for the new Agreement negotiated for the ANU Student Associations. ◆ Lachlan Clohesy, ACT Division Organiser Below: NTEU Bargaining Reps Sam Guthrie, Kate Buscombe and baby Joe. Lachlan Clohesy

NEWS ◆

Merry Christmas and a No, No, No! Just weeks before Christmas last year, Monash College management launched a non-union ballot to drive through a substandard Enterprise Agreement on its workforce of around 1000 teaching and professional staff.

In exchange for a piffling 2% payrise management wanted a spread of ordinary hours of 7.30am – 9.30pm Monday to Friday with no penalty rates. Meanwhile, staff had not had a payrise in 18 months.

Snap 15-minute Stop Work meetings To capture as many members as possible, Monash College NTEU delegates had the novel approach of organising four lots of snap 15-minute Stop Work meetings. A fast game’s a good game! All four meetings unanimously voted to launch a VOTE NO campaign to reject the sub-standard offer.

Vote NO! On the day the non-union ballot opened, the NTEU held two very well attended 'Vote NO Democracy Sausage' events. Ac-

Since 1958, the Australian Universities’ Review has been encouraging debate and discussion about issues in higher education and its contribution to Australian public life.

tivists overcame management propaganda, divide and rule tactics and the threat of legal action against the NTEU to defeat the ballot.

On the back of a convincing NO Vote, the NTEU secured an excellent Enterprise Agreement. Most importantly, the existing 8 am to 6 pm Spread of Hours was saved with penalty rates kicking in after 6pm. ◆ Mel Slee, Victorian Division Secretary Above: Frank Gafa, Sandra Green and Daniel Sammut with festively decorated Vote No banners.

AUR is published twice a year by the NTEU. 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 AUR, please email aur@nteu.org.au

www.aur.org.au ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

9

◆ NEWS

Highlights of the 2019 State of the Uni survey It seems, however, that these factors were despite, rather than because of the quality of management (Fig. 3).

In 2019, the NTEU conducted the largest ever general survey of the attitudes and workplace experiences of university staff in Australia – the State of the Uni Survey.

Overworked and underpaid Heavy workloads for academic staff, and unpaid hours for many general staff continue the trends from previous surveys (Fig. 4).

This was the third survey, following others in 2015 and 2017, and nearly 22,000 academic and general staff participated.

The estimated median hours for full-time academic staff is around 50 per week, with many thousands working more than 55 hours per week. This unsustainable level of working hours represents a serious medium-term threat to the health and safety of many employees.

The figures suggest the removal of excessive working hours of academic staff would provide enough work to properly employ nearly all the casual academics in universities.

Although not a random survey, the profile of the participants broadly reflected that of the sector, as to sex, occupation, classification, length of service and age, though a disproportionately high number of participants were union members.

Nevertheless, the survey results are likely to be a fair representation of the experiences and attitudes of those who work in the sector.

Satisfied, despite management

Around one-third of general staff are working additional hours beyond the standard working week, but without receiving any compensation for this (overtime or time-off-in lieu). This group works about 6 hours per week of unpaid

Consistent with the results of earlier surveys, most respondents said their work gave them satisfaction, was exciting and interesting, and they enjoyed a positive work relationship with colleagues (see Fig. 1 & 2).

20%

74% 13%

Agree or Strongly Agree Disagree or Strongly Disagree

Fig. 1: ‘My work gives my satisfaction’

27%

52%

46%

Managing change in the workplace

Performance of senior management

Fig. 3: Performance of management

53%

Positive relationship with colleagues

40%

Good work-life balance

40%

Exciting & interesting work environment

Fig. 2: Factors that contribute to work satisfaction

10

18% 22%

Always Usually

32%

Sometimes

Fig.4: How often do you work excessive hours?

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

NEWS ◆

overtime. If these figures are representative, the unpaid overtime is the equivalent of about 3000 additional jobs across the sector.

Health and Safety Despite most employees finding their work satisfying, the survey results indicate that existing work arrangements in the sector are taking their toll, at least on some staff.

More expert analysis is required to draw definitive conclusions about the symptoms employees report in the survey.

However, the results (Fig. 5) are consistent with earlier studies showing much higher levels of work-related mental health symptoms among university staff than the general population.

More specifically, 37% of academics agree or strongly agree that they have received abusive comments in student satisfaction surveys.

Academic issues There are serious concerns among academics about a number of issues.

• 30% agree or strongly agree that they feel pressure to pass full fee paying students whose work is not good enough.

For the first time, questions were asked in the 2019 survey about general staff casuals' perception of their work. Interestingly, most of these perceive this work as their primary livelihood and work on a regular and substantial basis.

The State of the Sector Large majorities of staff agree on quite a number of issues when it comes to how universities are managed (Fig. 6).

2019 NTEU

STATE OF

THE UNI Have your say!

Further analysis A further report in the next edition of Advocate will deal in more detail about the experiences and attitudes of those in insecure work. ◆

The third biennial national survey of staff working in Australian high er education. Take part toda y!

SURVEY

This survey is conducted by NTEU every two years to establish longitudinal information on university staff views about: • The sector • Your University • Your Conditions at work • The Union that repre sents University staff Join us to help build the pictu

re.

Ken McAlpine, National Industrial Officer (Research & Projects)

WWW.NTEU.ORG.AU/STATEOFTHEUN

I

Authorised by M. McGowan,

General Secretary, NTEU,

120 Clarendon St, Sth

Melbourne VIC 3205

Find out more at nteu.org.au/stateoftheuni

• R emarkably, 69% think students are enrolled who lack the basic skills necessary to succeed.

• Only 9% thought student satisfaction surveys were an accurate measure of teaching quality.

Strongly Agree

Agree

Australian uni’s are under financial pressure

Insecure work Most university employees are employed on a fixed term or casual basis. As shown in previous surveys, this is not because of employee choice. For example only 18% of casual academics and 27% of casual general staff prefer casual employment.

Pressure to make money is reducing quality of education

Uni’s have become too corporate in their outlook Always or usually reporting:

26%

Extreme fatigue

42%

Stress

General staff are under-resourced in many work areas

32%

Anxiety

Fig.5: Workplace health & safety concerns

Excessive reliance on casual & fixed term employment is affecting the quality of education

34%

Disagree or Strongly Disagree

39%

8%

58%

27%

3%

55%

25%

6%

29%

39%

9%

41%

31%

7%

Fig.6: State of the sector

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

11

◆ WERTE!

Screening The Final Quarter across Qld NTEU Queensland Division held more than half a dozen screenings of the documentary The Final Quarter for members and friends across the state to increase awareness of the ingrained structural and casual racism experienced

by First Nations Australians inside and outside sport.

'After each viewing we held a Q and A session to talk about what this racism looks like when we see it in our lives and workplaces, and what we can do to call it out when it does occur. ' The Final Quarter is a 2019 Australian documentary about the final years of Adam Goodes’ Australian Rules Football career – during which he was the target of repeated racial abuse by fans, as well as members of the Australian media and football commentariat.

The film traces the abuse of Goodes from 2013, when during the AFL's annual Indigenous Round, a 13-year-old Collingwood supporter called Adam Goodes, an Adnyamathanha and Narungga man, an 'ape'.

Upon hearing the abuse, Goodes pointed the girl out to security, who ejected her from the stadium.

Goodes was deeply affected by the incident, but never blamed the girl for her actions. The girl phoned to apologise, saying that she hadn't realised the impact of her words.

Four days later, on Triple M’s Breakfast show, Collingwood President Eddie McGuire suggested Goodes promote the musical King Kong – a remark he later apologised for.

In 2014, Goodes was named Australian of the Year by Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Goodes used this platform to promote reconciliation and the acknowledgement

12

In this new look edition of Advocate, we've taken the opportunity to rename the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander News section to Werte!

An Arrernte word, werte (pronounced wer-da) a greeting like 'hello'. It can also be used to grab someone’s attention.

Arrernte is spoken in the Northern Territory around mparntwe/Alice Springs. ◆ Celeste Liddle, National A&TSI Organiser

NTEU Queensland and Northern Territory Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Officer Phil Mairu presented the films to members at a number of campuses.

'At every viewing I went to, I noticed it was a different part of the documentary that people reacted to,' said Phil.

Werte!

of racism towards Indigenous Australians.

For this he was punished.

Over the following years, and particularly in 2015, Goodes was repeatedly and loudly booed by opposition fans at most matches. The motivation for, and acceptability of, the booing generated wide public debate. Was he being singularly booed for his supposed bad sportsmanship, or because he was a proud Blackfella who didn’t know his place?

As Waleed Ali says in the documentary: Australia is generally a very tolerant society, until its minorities demonstrate that they don’t know their place. And at that moment, the minute a minority – someone in a minority position acts as though they’re not a mere supplicant, then we lose our minds. And we say, ‘No, no you’ve got to get back in your box here’.

The film is powerful. It does not use interviews or narration. It merely plays the events of the past as they happened and in context, so that viewers can draw their own conclusion.

As well as highlighting the abuse suffered

by Goodes, and refusing it to be downplayed, or forgotten, the film scratches away the veneer to show the defensiveness, awkwardness and hostility shown

by White Australia when issues of race are raised. ◆ Mike Oliver, Senior State Organiser, Qld Division Image: Phil Mairu at a screening in Brisbane of The Final Quarter.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

http://www.metromagazine.com.au

NTEU is currently embarking on a series https://theeducationshop.com.au A STUDY GUIDE BY of©screenings of The Final Quarter.

KATY All MARRINER ATOM 2019 ISBN: 978-1-76061-277-1 Divisions have received information with regards to the film and arranging local screenings. If you are interested in any screenings which might be happening in your area, or are interested in organising one, please contact your local Branch and/or Division for information.

The film is available for online streaming at http://thefinalquarterfilm.com.au.

Educational materials regarding the film are also available at this website.

For further information, please contact Celeste Liddle, National A&TSI Organiser, cliddle@nteu.org.au.

WERTE! ◆

Invasion Day rallies call for real recognition Over the past five or so years, Invasion Day rallies across the country have grown to a point where, in some cities, the attendance numbers far outstrip the numbers seen at official Australia Day gatherings.

NTEU has for many years supported the right to assert sovereignty and the right to self-determination for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander members and community and thus has proudly supported the Invasion Day rallies. Many of our members were seen in the numbers across the country which in some areas exceeded 50,000 people.

Yet year after year, the mainstream media and conservative politicians ensure the public remain misinformed about Invasion Day and what its aims are.

Think-pieces detailing alleged pushes to 'Change the Date', even though most rally organisers around the country actively reject that idea in preference for real recognition of sovereignty and land rights, dominate the papers. Politicians additionally bend over backwards to reinforce nationalism and it’s important to note that in 2020, this has reached a new farcical level – the Morrison Government is spending several million dollars to send a replica Endeavour around Australia

undertaking a circumnavigation which never happened in honour of the 250th anniversary of James Cook’s landing on the eastern seaboard.

Yet it must be noted that far from a call to 'Change the Date', Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have been protesting on 26/1 since 1938 – more than 50 years before Australia Day became a gazetted public holiday. What started with the Day of Mourning action has gone through a number of iterations over the years – including the 1988 Convergence, Survival Day events and of course the protests. Regardless of the label, the message that we have survived and we’re going nowhere resonates strongly.

Australia has a long way to go before it reconciles with its own past and recognises the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Even in our learned institutions, racism and erasure are still a normal experience for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workers, as the NTEU’s I’m still not a racist, but… report details. Western supremacy dictates which knowledges, life experiences and teaching styles are deemed valid and which are secondary.

was terra nullius 250 years ago still very much permeates not only our institutions but also the national psyche. Last year at NTEU National Council, a motion was passed for the repatriation of artefacts and remains, access to our knowledges so often stored wrongfully under white lock and key, and for the proper respect to be shown to traditional owner groups as these knowledge holders.

Recognition of knowledge, recognition of land and recognition of sovereignty is key to the struggle fought not just on Invasion Day but every day of the year.

When we see the numbers of supporters growing, we cannot help but think that perhaps the tide is turning and more people are interested in knowing the true history of this land and rectifying the wrongs. 250 years is a long time to be ignoring the obvious. Until this shifts, we can expect Invasion Day protests to continue. ◆ Celeste Liddle, National A&TSI Organiser Image: Celeste Liddle (right) at the Melbourne Invasion Day rally, 26 Jan 2020.

Brendan Bonsack

A key part of combatting this ignorance is education and the valuing of these knowledge systems, as Cook’s idea that this land

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

13

◆ WERTE!

A&TSI staffing data signals a slowdown University staffing data for 2019 incorporating all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staffing data has yet to be released – almost five months since the data was scheduled to be published.

NTEU is concerned that the Department of Education, Skills and Employment is holding the public release of the data potentially concealing the real state of A&TSI employment across the sector.

Growth of fixed term A&TSI staff

4.2% 20%

22.5% 18.3%

10%

2009–13

2014–18

Total ongoing and fixed term A&TSI staff

Fig. 1: Change in fixed term A&TSI staff in higher education

In October 2019, the Minister for Education, Dan Tehan, announced a growth in the numbers of A&TSI students applying for and participating in tertiary education courses. At the time the student data was published there was a reported growth from the 2018 higher education full-year student data.

While this announcement was positive, NTEU responded to those media releases to express concern that the numbers of A&TSI staff employed in both ongoing and fixed-term (contract) jobs had decreased under the Coalition Government (2014–2018), in comparison to the previous Labor Governments (2009–2013).

Examining the Government’s 2018 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander employment data reveals: • A 4.2% decrease in total ongoing and fixed-term A&TSI staff employed while the Coalition has been in office (Fig. 1).

20%

10%

11.1%

8.0% 3.1%

2009–13

2014–18

Fig. 2: Change in total ongoing A&TSI employment in higher education

• An 8% decrease in total ongoing and fixed-term employment over the same period (Fig. 2).

• Only 13.1% of A&TSI peoples who hold a PhD or non-school qualification are employed by an Australian tertiary education provider.

ISSP funding cuts fear In the lead up to the Federal Budget in March, NTEU is concerned that funding allocated under the previous Budget, particularly forward estimates, will be cut with the repercussions being felt

by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and their families. Support for

14

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

students is funded under the Indigenous Student Success Program (ISSP) that provides supplementary funding for cultural, pastoral and tutorial support.

While the Department had praised the success of the ISSP, in actuality the ISSP has been targeted with the only nominal increase coming from CPI adjustments.

The current allocation of $70.41 million has been reduced from the previous Federal Budget (2018-2019) by $3.32 million in the current year with a further $7.66 million removed across the forward estimates.

The Union is also concerned about the implementation and operation of the Federal Government's ISSP guidelines, particularly the requirement for Table A and B institutions to increase A&TSI employment to 3% of all ongoing and fixed-term university staff. Unfortunately, this funding requirement is not backed by identified appropriate funding, with some university A&TSI employment strategies falling short of ensuring greater employment outcomes.

The statistics puts this into perspective, showing that the numbers of A&TSI student enrolments have increased by almost 20,000 (or 45%) from 2013; conversely the total number of A&TSI university staff has only increased by 18.3%. To achieve the 3% A&TSI employment target stipulated in the ISSP guidelines, nationally a minimum additional 2,251 A&TSI staff would need to be appointed, not accounting for the growth of non-A&TSI employment.

Concern for student outcomes Of greatest concern are educational outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. Many questions regarding student support remain unanswered, for example: • How will A&TSI student enrolment/ retention and staffing data trends compare with Federal Budget outcomes?

• Will newly enrolling and returning A&TSI students be appropriately supported and assisted on campus?

WERTE! ◆

It gets a little bit lonelier each week...

We have reached the year that was the focus, in 2008, for the Australia 2020 Summit in Canberra, where the NTEU A&TSI Policy Committee had asked then National President Caroline Allport to speak about the proposal that A&TSI Peoples be able to gain voluntary early access to retirement, pension and superannuation.

The final report contained clause 7.36: ‘Re-appraise superannuation for A&TSI people: their shorter life expectancies mean they have less opportunity to enjoy superannuation after retirement.’

Many will be lucky to live long enough to reach retirement age. Collecting superannuation is almost hypothetical for many at present.

Many A&TSI Peoples are employed in lower earning capacity positions and this is exacerbated by work being inconsistent rather than ongoing.

A&TSI women face even worse superannuation outcomes.

They ‘are more likely to be a sole parent, have a higher birth rate, larger families… more likely to make major changes to their work life balance to accommodate these responsibilities. If employed… more likely to be of intermittent casual or part time… are less likely than any other group to have a retirement that offers more than poverty and deprivation.’

(NATSIWA submission 65) There have been various conferences/consultations recently within the industry about A&TSI superannuation. Much emphasis has been on administrative complications, extended kinship matters and contribution ‘solutions’. This situation

ignores the failure of Closing the Gap. The median age of the A&TSI population is 21 years so the problem is a growing one and cannot be ignored.

A precedent argument that other groups will wish to claim the right to early access holds little weight. If there is another identifiable group in Australia that has the same proven disadvantage, then they also would have the opportunity to request the change. This is not about privilege but reparation of an inherited legacy.

The ACTU has 5 priorities in the ‘Our Voice, Our Future’ policy concerning A&TSI Peoples. One of these deals with retirement savings. It calls among other issues, for: • A reduction in the statutory retirement age and superannuation access age for A&TSI workers which reflects the life expectancy gap.

• A reduction/amendment to the statutory age for accessing the old age pension and or any other relevant government benefits.

• A review of the tax-free threshold status in conjunction with a reduction in the statutory age for accessing superannuation.

Compassionate release or hardship provisions are not the answer and seen by many as offensive. Decisions are still being made on behalf of people.

We need action not dialogue. Surely one superannuation company has the moral fortitude to work with us to convince government to remove the impediments to voluntary early access?

This is not just a matter of equity but a matter of humanity for individuals, families and communities. It is repugnant enough that people die younger through no fault of their own but to miss the opportunity to do so in a socially richer environment, where they can enjoy the quality time with family and grandchildren that others enjoy, denies them of some dignity. There have been too many funerals lately. ◆ Terry Mason, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Policy Committee

A&TSI staffing data signals a slowdown cont...

• Will places of cultural safety and gathering continue in an environment of reduced funding?

While many questions remain, NTEU is concerned that: • Appropriate levels of funding are not being allocated to the ISSP • Places of cultural safety for A&TSI students are disappearing from campus • A&TSI employment clauses in University Collective Agreements are being constantly challenged by university management and bargaining teams, therefore stifling employment opportu-

nities for potential A&TSI academic and general/professional staff • In the main university A&TSI employment strategies provide little detail on how to achieve the 3% employment target.

While the Government claims success in the growth of A&TSI student numbers, programs and strategies are not sufficient, funding is stagnant and A&TSI employment will not increase without the direct influence of the NTEU. The current upside-down duck approach employed by the Government for A&TSI

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

tertiary education and employment (legs appearing to run while the duck drowns) will only result in fewer A&TSI students being attracted to attend university, lower numbers of staff employed and overall less assistance for those students who remain. ◆ Adam Frogley, National A&TSI Director Selected Higher Education Statistics – 2018 Staffing Data are available online at www.education.gov.au/selected-higher-education-statistics-2018-staff-data

15

◆ FUNDING Image: Drought landscape. Cinoby/istockphoto

Government must end the higher education funding drought NTEU’s 2020–21 pre-Budget submission is calling on the Government to urgently address the current unsustainable funding and regulatory framework for higher education.

58,778

$52,500 $11,955

al

tu

$11,188 -6.4%

$51,500

fore

cas

t

$10,545 -5.8%

34,423

40,000

26,163

30,000 20,000

$50,500

17,866 9,137

10,000 2012 13

14

15

16

17

18

19 2020 21

22

23

24 2025

Fig. 1: Commonwealth Contribution (Commonwealth Grants Scheme–CGS) per Commonwealth Supported Place (CSP) with Freeze in Enrolments (Real 2018 values)

16

42,411

50,000

$51,000

$50,000

50,580

60,000 ac

$52,000

2019

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

Fig. 2: Number of eligible students missing out on a place if universities freeze enrolments

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

FUNDING ◆

ment which will ensure our public universities are able to continue to offer world class education, research and community service.

The ongoing problem The level of public investment in our public universities is expected to continue to dry-up when measured both as a share of GDP and total government spending.

Our public universities’ over dependence on private income, especially from overseas students, will become ever the more apparent the longer the travel bans associated with COVID-19 (coronavirus) remain in place (see report, p. 4).

We are advocating for the level of public investment in our public universities as a share of GDP to be increased in four stages to 1% of GDP which is about the OECD average.

This level of public investment would be enough to not only allow the Government to abolish tuition fees for all domestic undergraduate students and increase the level of real government funding by 10% per student, it would also provide sufficient resources to pursue policies aimed at lifting the participation by underrepresented student cohorts and investing more in research and research training.

Our submission shows how the funding ‘freeze’ and so-called ‘growth’ funding tied to increases in the 18-64 year old population is not sufficient to cover increasing costs, let alone any expansion of the higher education participation rate of 18–64 year olds. The consequences of this policy will be a significant decline in the level of real funding per government-supported student.

Secondly, we are also repeating our call for the introduction of a new sustainable funding and regulatory framework, which would be administered by an independent agency at arm’s length from day to day political decision-making. This agency would be responsible for negotiating a Public Accountability Agreement (PAA) with each university, which would:

If on the other hand, universities freeze or even reduce enrolments, in response to this funding freeze, we will see rapidly growing numbers of eligible students missing out on a university place. The problem of ‘unmet demand’ will be even further accentuated by the upcoming spike of the Costello baby boomers that are due to complete Year 12 over the next three to five years.

• Require the university to demonstrate it has the capacity to ensure that every student it enrols has a genuine opportunity to successfully complete their studies.

NTEU’s solution Our submission shows higher education has not only been subject to declining levels of public investment but also to a high degree policy uncertainty. It has risen to the top of the ‘hit list’ for both sides of politics whenever they are looking for budgetary savings.

• Provide a better planned and managed mechanism for the allocation of Commonwealth supported students places.

• Provide the necessary flexibility to allow for changing student and/or workforce demands, and

In order to overcome this unsustainable approach to regulation and funding of higher education, the NTEU is calling for governments of all political persuasions to firstly, provide a medium to long term commitment to a level of public invest-

• Ensure our public universities are fully accountable to their students, staff and the communities they serve.

Unlike the current sector wide performance funding framework which requires

all universities to meet common sector wide student achievement targets, PAAs allow for individual universities to negotiate bespoke agreements that include a set of indicators and proposed objectives to meet the particular needs or requirements of their students, staff and communities. From NTEU’s point of view, PAAs should also allow for some of TEQSA’s identified risk factors, such as an over reliance on insecurely employed staff to deliver teaching or a lack of research leadership, to be publicly acknowledged, accounted for and addressed.

PAAs could and should also be used to provide a level of coordination and cooperation across the sector in terms of the allocation of government supported enrolments. While each university would nominate the number of government supported students it intended to enrol, PAAs could be used to overcome a situation where every university suddenly wanted to increase their enrolments of teacher education or nursing students by 20% which might lead to difficulties in finding each new student an industry placement.

In other circumstances the Government might be concerned about producing too many or too few graduates in certain discipline areas. For example, PAAs could be used as a mechanism of ensuring that critical STEM based degrees continue to be offered and readily accessible.

The proposed funding and regulatory framework would not only overcome the uncertainty and instability caused by recent policy decisions, it would also protect institutional autonomy while ensuring accountability to the Government, students, staff and the broader community. ◆ Paul Kniest, Director (Policy & Research)

24

GD

P

22

$10.4b

$10.7b

13.1

13.3

13.5

21–22

22–23

23–24

24–25

25–26

en t

12.6

12.9

$7.8b

es

12.8

13.0 12.1

12 10

15–16

16–17

17–18

11.4

18–19

12.1

19–20

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

12.4

20–21

$5.3b

inv

16 14

Fig. 3: Public expenditure on Higher Education Sustainable Funding (1% of GDP) Gap ($ billions) if universities freeze enrolments

tm

18

$2.6b

$ billions

at

1%

20

projections

17

◆ ACADEMIC FREEDOM

Gerd case not over yet Despite a huge backdown by Murdoch University, whistleblower Gerd Schröder-Turk’s case continues in the Federal Court.

In mid-January, Murdoch University staff were surprised to read an all staff email that the University had decided to withdraw the financial component of its lawsuit against whistleblower, Associate Professor Gerd Schröder-Turk. The University’s retreat is a huge advance in Gerd’s case, but by no means is the case over.

Recap In May 2019, Gerd and two colleagues appeared on ABC’s Four Corners, denouncing Murdoch University’s practices in relation to international students. Gerd is the academic staff elected representative on the University Senate, and following the program, a motion was put to remove Gerd from the governing body.

Gerd brought legal proceedings alleging the University’s actions were an infringement on his right to academic freedom, breached the Fair Work Act and were reprisal action against him for whistleblowing. The University defended those claims, but also shamelessly counter-sued Gerd for his role in throwing light on its own practices with international students. Murdoch’s claim is that Gerd breached his duties to the University, and it sought millions of dollars in lost revenue.

#IStandWithGerd Murdoch’s actions struck a chord with the higher education community, and the broader community, who solidified and galvanised support behind the academic.

Members of parliament, interest groups, students, and NTEU members all contributed to showing Murdoch just how wrong its actions were.

The outpouring of support for Gerd has not wavered. The power of this support for Gerd and the backlash against Murdoch led the university to rethink its decision to sue him. In January 2020, the University wrote to all staff that it had advised its lawyers to withdraw the financial component of the claim against him – but not the whole lawsuit.

18

Gerd Schröder-Turk thanks his many supporters My name is Gerd Schröder-Turk. Some of you might recognise me, some of you might know me personally, and some of you might have just read about my story.

I am here to express my and my family's heartfelt gratitude for the wonderful support that's been given to us by so many, through this petition, through the NTEU campaign and other ways.

I feel humbled by so many kind messages, each and every one gratefully appreciated and much needed.

Yet, I also feel emboldened by the many strong and clear voices that demand protection for everyone's right to speak the truth. Even on uncomfortable topics. And I feel empowered by all those who supported my, Grahame's and Duncan's concerns for the wellbeing of our students and academic integrity.

'Those who are strong enough to assert their rights have a responsibility to protect others especially those who are dependent on them'. This is the quote from Murdoch University's Code of Ethics and I attempt to live up to this expectation in everything I do.

I would now like to thank all of you for having done exactly that for me at a time when I most needed your support. Thank you to everyone. Thank you very much!

Watch the video at www.youtube.com/user/nteu

Where to from here?

Since then, Murdoch wrote to all staff stating that it had contacted Gerd’s lawyers to try and reach a settlement.

This is excellent news for Gerd, and a major retreat by Murdoch. At this stage, however, the case continues. ◆ Kelly Thomas, Senior Legal Officer Stay updated about Gerd’s case at nteu.org.au/istandwithgerd

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

ACADEMIC FREEDOM ◆ Image: Weerapat Kiatdumrong/123rf

Where are we at with academic freedom?

Following the confected crisis of free speech on university campuses fuelled by conservative think tanks including the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) and the Centre for Independent Studies (CIS), the Government asked the former Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia, and current UWA Chancellor, Robert French, to undertake a review of academic freedom and free speech at Australia’s universities.

Justice French’s report, Review into University Freedom of Speech, which was published in April last year included a comprehensive analysis of government policy, university policies, procedures and codes of conduct, enterprise agreements as well as NTEU policy. The report concluded that '(T)here is no evidence, on the basis of recent events, which would answer the pejorative description of a ‘free speech crisis’ on campus.'

While French found no evidence of a crisis, he did however conclude that some universities' policies ‘are so broadly framed as to be a burden on academic freedom or free speech.’

He also described trying to tidy up all existing university policies, procedures and codes of conduct as being equivalent to the Herculean task of cleaning the Augean stables. Instead French recommended:

• The voluntary adoption by each university of a Model Code as an umbrella set of principles for academic freedom and free speech.

• A mending the Higher Education Support Act (HESA) 2003 and the Higher Education Standards Framework (Threshold Standards) 2015 to clarify the language around the concept of what is currently expressed as ‘free intellectual inquiry’.

The Minister for Education, Dan Tehan, made it clear to all universities that he expected each of them to consider how they might adopt French’s proposed model code to suit their own circumstances.

Just to make sure universities understood that he was very serious about this, the latest round of Mission Based Compacts (yes, they still do exist) required each university to report on progress in the development and implementation of this ‘voluntary’ code.

At a number of universities, the University of Sydney being the most prominent, the development of the code included genuine consultation and participation by staff and student groups, including the local NTEU branch.

The NTEU was able to secure a number of important changes to Sydney’s proposed code including clarifying that academic freedom applied to all staff engaged in academic activities, not just those classified as academics. Feedback indicates that the process was a positive experience not only for our members, but also

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

for the university. This level of consultation and cooperation, however has not been case at all universities.

While the development of individual institutional polices is proceeding, the Government is also proposing to amend the HESA (2003) and associated standards, firstly by replacing the phrase ‘free intellectual inquiry’ with phrase ‘academic freedom and free speech’ and secondly, by inserting a definition of academic freedom (based on that proposed by Justice French) into HESA 2003 and the standards.

The NTEU is largely supportive of the proposed changes because we believe they will help clarify and strengthen universities' obligations to have policies that uphold the rights of individuals to academic freedom. However, we are seeking to clarify that the definition of staff includes all staff employed in academic activities and not just those classified as ‘academic staff’.

While supportive of the proposed changes, they will never be a substitute for having strong protections of academic freedom as part of our collective agreements. We still maintain the position that the only truly enforceable protection of individual staff member’s academic freedom rights is that provided in collective agreements. Therefore, all members can be reassured that the NTEU will continue to fight for strong and improved academic freedom clauses in our Enterprise Agreements. ◆ Paul Kniest, Director (Policy & Research)

19

◆ ACADEMIC FREEDOM Image: Galahs in flight. David Cook

Free and equal NTEU’s submission to the AHRC’s proposal for a national Human Rights Framework In 2019, the Australian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) launched a series of papers, supported by a national conference and community roundtables, proposing the establishment of a national human rights framework. Promoted as being a ‘National Conversation’, the AHRC’s consultation was intended to identify what principles and key elements would make up an effective system of human rights protections, on a national level. The findings of the review would then inform what the AHRC described as 'a comprehensive reform agenda to modernise human rights protection for all.'

Dr Terri MacDonald, NTEU Policy & Research Officer

20

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

ACADEMIC FREEDOM ◆

The AHRC’s proposal covered a number of issues that intersect with the interests of trade unions, including: • Religious and other exemptions • Discrimination at work on the grounds of trade union activity, political opinion and irrelevant criminal record.

• Family responsibilities discrimination.

• Family and domestic violence (among other things) as new protected attributes.

• Better compliance/enforcement measures and complaints processes, including reversing the onus of proof.

• W hether or not we need a charter of human rights.

The NTEU’s submission supported the recommendations made by the ACTU and other unions for legislative reform around these broader issues.

We also examined particular issues relevant to higher education – in particular, the intersection between academic freedom and freedom of intellectual inquiry with discrimination on the basis of union activity and political opinion, and how academic freedom would fit more broadly within a national framework.

Protecting human rights In our recent submissions on the Religious Freedom Bills, the French Review and the AHRC’s National Sexual Harassment Inquiry (held in early 2019), we consistently argued that while it is important to review existing protections for human rights (noting that in a number of areas, Australia does not meet its international obligations) and that more robust measures to protect human rights should be considered, equally important is the need to ensure that existing rights are not undermined by any new laws or frameworks. While supporting the AHRC’s Principles for its framework, we highlighted the AHRC’s own statement that 'Any reform to discrimination law should improve protection across the community. It should not involve creating new forms of discrimination against any sector of society.' We strongly agree with this principle, and it is the primary basis for our opposition to legislation such as that proposed with the Religious Freedom Bill (see report, p. 42).

It was also largely because of this premise that, when in 2012 the then Government released a Draft Exposure Human Rights and Discrimination Bill 2012 (HRAD Bill), the NTEU was unable to support the proposed legislation. In particular, one of our major concerns at the time was the need to ensure that any new legislation would not inadvertently result in the lessoning of human rights protections for any group.

Similarly, we were concerned that in defining and delineating what constitutes human rights and freedoms, there may be the unintended consequence of restricting human rights, either through design or omission. Our views were not unique and the legislation at that time did not progress, largely due to the concerns of flow on effects that came to light during consultations.

Sexual harassment and discrimination That said, however, we agree that improvements and consolidation of numerous areas of human rights legislation should be made, and the AHRC’s framework presents that opportunity.

For example, NTEU has previously argued that legislation around sexual harassment and discrimination needs review and reinforcement. In particular, sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace should be viewed as psycho-social workplace hazards and come under workplace health and safety laws, as well as other industrial relations laws and regulations that deal with workplace hazards and the protection of workers.

We also agree with the AHRC’s assessment that there is a plethora of anti-discrimination and human rights related legislation and policy at both national and state level, which is both complex and, in many cases, difficult to access.

As a result, provisions can be rendered ineffective in their practical application.

Furthermore, we know that ‘intersectional discrimination’ is a problem, as is the impact of duplication, which may see one law overrule another provision, even if it is weaker in effect.

Laws around sexual harassment, discrimination, sexism and gender discrimination illustrate both the problems with the complexity of the various frameworks and the ineffectiveness of the current protections.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Coalition's undermining of rights While we agree with the AHRC’s assessment of the limitations and problems around current legislation, the NTEU also noted concerns around the current Government’s attempts to implement legislation that purposefully seeks to undermine the rights of particular groups or sections of the community, and what impact this could have on the AHRC’s proposal. While the proposed Religious Freedom Bill is one obvious concern, there are numerous other discriminatory Bills, such as the anti-union Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Ensuring Integrity) Bill 2019 Legislation.

In relation to these concerns, we highlighted how the Government consistently fails to take into account the impacts of legislation on human rights, often choosing to ignore the findings of the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights (PJCHR), whose purpose is to expressly review the impact of proposed legislation on our human rights obligations and laws. Interestingly, while the PJCHR examined the proposed Ensuring Integrity Bill and found significant human rights violations, its report has been largely ignored by the Government.

Academic and intellectual freedom NTEU’s recommendations to the AHRC broadly supports the proposal for a human rights framework, but we also called for strengthening legislation around academic and intellectual freedom, and highlighted the need to ensure that any new human rights framework will not inadvertently result in the lessoning of human rights protections for any group.

Drawing from this premise, we call for consideration of how legislation such as the Ensuring Integrity Bill and the Religious Freedom Bills would impact on a national human rights framework.

As a way to assist with this issue, we put forward the proposition that any federally based human rights framework, regardless of its final form, must at the very least incorporate a legislative review process with greater authority than there currently exists and where recommendations of this authority have enforceability. ◆

21

◆ ACADEMIC FREEDOM Image: Kylie Moore-Gilbert. University of Melbourne

Scholars at Risk Protecting academic freedom worldwide 'State authorities around the world used detentions, prosecutions, and other coercive legal measures to punish and restrict hundreds of scholars’ and students’ research, teaching and extra-mural expression and associations. These actions are frequently carried out under laws or on grounds ostensibly related to national security, terrorism, sedition and defamation. Higher education administrations used their own disciplinary measures, including suspensions and dismissals to retaliate against and silence critical expression by personnel and students.'

Scholars at Risk, Freedom to Think, 2019

Gabe Gooding, NTEU National Assistant Secretary

22

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

ACADEMIC FREEDOM ◆ Reported Attacks on Higher Education 18/2/2019–18/2/2020

Scholars at Risk is an international network of institutions and individuals who work to protect scholars and promote academic freedom. They work directly with academics under threat to find them a safe harbour and they run campaigns for scholars who are imprisoned or silenced at home.

109

74

Prosecution

42

Loss of Position

19

Travel Restrictions

6

Other

28

Killings, Violence, Disappearances Imprisonment

Fig. 1: Reported Attacks on Higher Education, Feb 2019 to In the previous 12 Feb 2020 (Source: Scholars At Risk) months, they reported 324 attacks on higher tried and sentenced to imprisonment education communities across 56 counin Tehran's Evin prison for 10 years for tries (Fig. 1). 'espionage'.

Countries highlighted in the report will The Australian Government has described perhaps not be a surprise. the situation as 'complex' and there is limited direct information available about China her circumstances except what has apArrests, travel restrictions and dismissal peared in two smuggled out letters, one of academics who are considered out of of which is reproduced here: step with the Chinese Communist Party ideology and goals. In the Xinjiang Uyghur region academics and students have been targeted for imprisonment in the infamous 're-education' camps that recently received public attention.

Turkey

Australia Australian academics at home do not face the daily prospect of arrest and imprisonment for pursuing their academic work, nevertheless the statement at the beginning of this article will resonate with many. The increasing restrictions on our freedom under the guise of national security and the use by university managements of disciplinary measures to suppress dissent are with us now.

While there have been outbreaks of obvious assaults to academic freedom which allow us to rally around the cause, (the cases of Gerd SchrĂśder-Turk at Murdoch and Peter Ridd at JCU come immediately to mind) the changing environment in the sector is as big a threat if not bigger.

As our universities become more and more dependent on fee income, with their governance processes dominated by businesspeople who advocate for 'business models' of management, where brand management is king – collegiate governance falls by the wayside.

Add to that mix the increasing casualisation of the workforce, where there is no doubt the capacity to assert academic freedom rights is severely limited by the power imbalance produced by precarious work, and we have a situation which puts academic freedom under extreme strain.

The creeping tide of incrementalism is a real concern. Every time that academic staff accept a small restriction on academic freedom – such as what you can teach and how you teach it; how you assess work (are you ‘required’ to produce a set pass rate? Do you feel under pressure to pass students who you believe should not pass?); what you research (are you pushed to conduct research within your university’s 'strategic' priorities?); how you are consulted (has your input into governance declined?) – we accept a weakening of academic freedom.

Signing a petition critical of state actions or being involved with individuals or groups in opposition to the Government has led to thousands of academics being accused of disloyalty, treason or terrorism, and as a result there have been arrests, imprisonment, bans on employment and foreign travel restrictions.

Sudan In response to nationwide protests around economic conditions the Government has closed universities and used lethal force to suppress dissent by scholars and students.

As one of the countries that has a strong history of protection of academic freedom, we also have a responsibility to those who suffer abuse to work hard to prevent freedoms being eroded from both ends. We must be vigilant, and we must reject restrictions on academic freedom whenever and wherever they occur.

Brazil Police have raided campuses and minority students and academics have been attacked both on and off campus.

Legislation aimed at undercutting the institutional autonomy of universities and suppressing academic freedom has been used alongside budgetary measures to suppress dissent on campuses.

NTEU is committed to this stance. We are also a proud supporter of Scholars at Risk and we recommend that members consider joining to show support for this important work. â—†

Iran Of particular concern to all of us at NTEU is the situation facing NTEU member Kylie Moore-Gilbert who has been arrested,

Find out more and join at www.scholarsatrisk.org/join

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 â—† MARCH 2020

23

◆ COLUMNIST Ian Lowe, Emeritus Professor of Science, Technology & Society, Griffith University Adjunct Professor at Southgate Institute for Health, Society & Equity, Flinders University

Scientists' warning ignored for decades In 1980, the Australian Academy of Science held a conference in Canberra to review the emerging science about the potential for humans to change the global climate. To promulgate the findings, Dr Brian Tucker edited a short monograph. Concern was heightened by a crucial 1985 world conference in the Austrian town of Villach. The research presented showed that burning fossil fuels and clearing land was changing the atmospheric concentrations of the 'greenhouse gases' that trap heat, together with evidence that the climate was changing.

In 1987, CSIRO scientists convened a national conference to consider potential impacts of climate change on every aspect of Australian life. The following year, the Commission for the Future worked with CSIRO on Greenhouse ’88, a national effort to inform the community about these serious issues. I gave many presentations that year and was persuaded by Henry Rosenbloom to write a paperback for Scribe Books. So in 1989, Living in the Greenhouse summarised the science: what was known, what was projected with some confidence, what remained uncertain.

It was already clear that human activity was changing the climate: increasing average temperatures, more very hot days, fewer very cold nights. There was also evidence of changing rainfall patterns and rising sea levels. It was projected with some confidence that the warming trend would continue, that sea levels would continue to rise and we would experience more extreme weather events: longer dry periods, more intense rainfall, stronger tropical cyclones. There was then some uncertainty about fire risk, which increases with higher temperature and stronger winds, but is significantly affected by rain. So it was projected that in some areas the hotter and windier conditions could be counterbalanced by increasing rainfall, while in others decreasing amounts of rain would lead to greater risk of fires.

By the time I wrote Living in the Hothouse, the devastating 2003 Canberra fires had caused a revised assessment. The CSIRO regional climate model projected increasing fire intensities and reducing time intervals between major fire events. A study by Dr Barry Pittock and his colleagues noted that extreme fire danger is correlated with drought conditions and very hot days before concluding 'Both these conditions are expected to increase… under all plausible scenarios, at least in southern Australia'. So we have known for at least fifteen years that climate change would produce the conditions for the catastrophic fire events we have seen in recent months. It has also been clear for decades that these events create feedback loops. Because it is hotter and drier, bushland is more likely to burn. That puts more carbon dioxide in the air, leading to hotter and drier conditions, making fires still more likely.

The worry is that the appalling fires this summer are a consequence of an increase of about one degree in average global temperatures. The Paris Agreement sought to limit the increase to two degrees, with an ambition to keep it down to 1.5 degrees.

But the 2019 conference in Madrid revealed that Paris commitments would not achieve even the less ambitious target. It also found that many countries do not yet have policies that would allow them to honour their Paris goals.

Embarrassingly, the Australian Government was arguing for an accounting trick to fudge our already inadequate target. Minister Angus Taylor told world leaders that we had met our commitments under the Kyoto Protocol with room to spare, so we should be allowed to count that as credit toward our Paris target. But those with long memories know that we only achieved our Kyoto target because it was uniquely generous. I was there, cringing with shame as the Howard Government delegation said we would only sign the Kyoto Protocol if we were allowed to increase our emissions by 10 per cent, when other OECD nations were agreeing to reduce theirs.

Even worse, when the targets had finally been agreed at 4 o’clock in the morning, our delegation argued that land use change should be included in the agreement. They wanted that because there had been huge amounts of land clearing in Queensland in the Kyoto baseline year of 1990. Pushing for what became known around the world as 'the Australia clause' meant that we could increase our greenhouse gas emissions by about 40 per cent when the rest of the developed world was reducing, then claim we should be given credit for achieving our Kyoto target! For chutzpah, that ranks with the apocryphal tale of the man who murdered both his parents and begged the court’s mercy on the grounds that he was now an orphan.

As the open letter that I signed last year said, the science is clear.

We can’t continue to violate the fundamental laws of nature or ignore the basic science with impunity. If we continue on the current path, our future is very bleak.

Australia’s current climate policies and practices are dire. Rather than making the urgent structural changes necessary for a sustainable and just transition toward zero emissions, the Australian Government is continuing to prop up and expand fossil fuel industries. I hoped history would record the 2019-20 fires as the tipping point that forced governments to respond to the crisis. But as I was writing, Scotty from Marketing was telling the National Press Club we need to burn more gas to reduce our greenhouse gas emissions. Like his claim we will halve our per capita emissions, that is just nonsense. ◆ Ian Lowe is an emeritus professor, prominent environmental scientist, and past president of the Australian Conservation Foundation.

Image: Scientists investigating an iceberg in Greenland. Aline Dassel/pixabay

24

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

CLIMATE EMERGENCY ◆ Image: Paperbark tea-tree resprouting post-fire. Doug Beckers/flickr

Bushfires spark green shoots of solidarity The bushfire crisis that swept Australia over summer was a shocking wake up call for all of us. Clearly, the impacts of climate change are here now and our political leaders remain inept and unprepared in the face of the crisis.

As National President Alison Barnes has remarked in her Advocate column, all of us knew someone – friends, family or neighbours – affected by the fires. The loss of life, destruction of country and loss of animals was heartbreaking and shocking. A number of NTEU members were directly impacted and sadly some lost homes and property.

When the National Office returned to work early this year, General Secretary Matt McGowan and staff were eager to reach out to members and offer whatever support and advice we could, given the scale of the crisis. In addition to providing members with advice about working when air quality was hazardous (and our rights not to work), the Union announced the creation of NTEU Emergency Grants of up to $1000 to assist those members worst affected. We also offered to waive membership fees for up to 3 months for people suffering financial hardship.

Several members took up this offer and the Union was able to distribute much needed funds to those most acutely af-

fected. The union movement has always been about supporting each other when times are tough and the conversations we had with folks who had been on the frontline and in need of assistance were moving.

We know that the climate crisis is not going away. We know that climate change exacerbates the frequency and severity of extreme weather events, like bushfires. In that context, we are aware that the creation of NTEU Emergency Grants and fee waivers for members are, whilst a worthwhile initiative in the immediate term, not sufficient to deal with the scale of the ongoing climate crisis.

Climate justice strategy With a view to tackling that crisis, the NTEU is currently working to finalise our comprehensive climate justice strategy, consistent with what members voted for at National Council via the Climate Emergency motion and the UniSuper: Fossil Fuel Divestment motions.

We are working on a strategy aimed at shifting our money, shifting our workplaces and shifting our politics away from the climate crisis and towards climate justice.

We are working with MarketForces to ensure members retirement savings are not supercharging climate change through supporting fossil fuel companies.

inspired by Greta Thunberg and our own Australian high school students, as preparations for the next Climate Strike on May 15 take shape.

We hope that all members can join with young people on the street on this day, so please put this date in your diary. We are hoping to set up a live, online video-call with the high school movement leaders so that NTEU members can hear directly from these young people about how we can work together.

Finally, we will be working within the Australian union movement nationally to encourage other unions to support a just transition, or a Green New Deal, for workers and union members.

Despite the tragic loss and the fear and the anxiety we all experienced through the bushfires over summer, we are hopeful that the green shoots of solidarity will continue to flower as we work together for climate justice in 2020. ◆ Jake Wishart, Communications Organiser (Digital) More about NTEU Emergency Grants and bushfire relief at nteu.org.au/emergency_grants

We will continue to build solidarity with the School Strike 4 Climate movement,

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

25

◆ CLIMATE EMERGENCY Image: School Strike 4 Climate, Canberra, March 2019. Leo Bild/flickr

Children, bushfire and climate change In November 2008, I sat around a table at Warrandyte Primary School with a small group of 10-year-old students. I was interviewing them for my doctoral research on children’s knowledge of vulnerability and resilience to bushfire in south-eastern Australia. The children told me what they loved about their beautiful bush suburb on the edge of the city: the trees, the river, the wildlife, and all the great places to play and explore. They also told me about the extreme bushfire risk. 'It’s going to be a really bad bushfire season', one of them said. 'It’s been a really long drought and the bush around here is really dry. Everything could go up. Just like that'. They all agreed that everyone needed to get prepared before summer arrived. A few months later, on 7 February 2009, the Black Saturday bushfires razed dozens of communities around Victoria: 173 people were killed, including 24 children.

Hundreds of people were injured. Over 2000 homes were destroyed. Natural ecosystems were devastated.

Everything went up. Just like that.

Dr Briony Towers, RMIT University Research Fellow, RMIT Centre for Urban Research/ Bushfire and Natural Hazards CRC

26

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

CLIMATE EMERGENCY ◆

Children know things Warrandyte was spared the devastation of Black Saturday. The fire was just 15 minutes away from that densely vegetated, heavily populated suburb when a south-westerly wind change pushed it in the other direction towards Kinglake.

When it arrived there it took 38 lives and destroyed over 500 homes.

Tess Pollock, then a 15-year-old student at Kinglake High School, survived the firestorm. With no time to evacuate, Tess and her mother dressed in old jeans and jumpers and placed buckets of water around the outside of the house. As embers began to rain down, they used mops to extinguish the spot fires. When the fire front arrived, they went inside to shelter from the radiant heat. After the front had passed, they lay together in the middle of the lounge room. Exhausted, but alive.

A little later that evening, fire roared through the idyllic rural township of Strathewen, taking 27 lives and destroying nearly every building, including the local primary school. When the fire began impacting on Strathewen, 8-year-old April was at home with her father and her younger siblings. It was too late to evacuate. While her father actively defended the property, April stayed inside the house and took care of the other children.

She kept them close and sang nursery rhymes to help them stay calm.

Her little sister Scarlett was just a baby at the time. She doesn’t remember the fire, but she is highly aware of the trauma and grief it wrought on her community.

At just 11-years-old, she has become a powerful advocate for children’s bushfire education. Appearing on ABC News late last year, she said 'Adults don’t generally listen to kids. So, if we can tell them what we can learn from a young age, we can continue that through our life. It’s good for kids to know how to act and how to react if something like that comes through again, and I really hope it won’t'.

Children are not passive victims In the aftermath of Black Saturday, the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission made a formal recommendation for bushfire education to be included in the National Curriculum. Their final report lamented that similar recommendations had been made in nearly every formal inquiry since 1939, but none of them had ever been properly implemented.

This time around, however, the topic of bushfire was incorporated into the National Curriculum for Grade 5 Geography, and state-based fire agencies set about

developing education materials to support implementation of this new curriculum content. By this stage I had completed my doctoral research and we used the findings to help ensure that children’s ways of knowing were being accommodated.

households, they lead to increased levels of household planning and preparedness and increased household capacity to respond to a bushfire event.

School-based evaluations of those new materials and programs revealed further insights into how children understand and relate to bushfire hazards and disasters. When comparing outcomes across programs, it became increasingly clear that the most effective bushfire education involves children as genuine participants in their own learning.

At Harkaway Primary School on Melbourne’s peri-urban fringe, the children have been engaging in problem-based learning for bushfire safety. They choose a problem of local relevance, investigate it in detail (often by interviewing subject matter experts), and then share their newly acquired knowledge and expertise with other children via interactive presentations, films, websites, and workshops.

While its important to provide children with credible, trustworthy information about bushfire planning and preparedness, the best outcomes are achieved when we encourage children to critically analyse bushfire risk in their own local context and support them to develop their own risk reduction strategies.

Children often have profound insights into the bushfire risks that exist in their households and communities. Their family might be renting which can restrict opportunities for structural mitigation and vegetation management. A member of their household might have a disability or a chronic illness, which makes leaving early on a ‘Code Red’ fire danger day a challenge. Maybe they don’t have an internet connection at home or the local mobile phone network is unreliable, making it difficult to receive or disseminate warnings.

Children are experts in their own lives Over the last several years, I’ve been fortunate to spend time in school communities where children’s knowledge, experience and expertise are prioritised throughout bushfire education process. At Anglesea Primary School on Victoria’s Surf Coast, the children collaborate with the CFA, local forest fire managers and other community members to enhance the township bushfire emergency management plan. The children also lead the design of community education workshops, which they deliver at public events and other schools.

At Strathewen Primary School, students produce Claymation films and books on a whole range of topics, from the local Indigenous fire history of the area to the fire danger rating system. While the children receive a lot of support and guidance from their local brigade and the wider community, they drive the process and make the decisions. These ‘child-led’ approaches not only exert a positive influence on bushfire knowledge and awareness in children’s

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Children have agency

The pedagogy is quite simple, but the children’s projects are often highly sophisticated. Last term, one group of students wanted to know if a bushfire could impact on their neighbourhood. In the absence of a child-friendly assessment tool, they developed their own by combining information from the Victorian Government ‘Mapshare Vic’ website, Google maps and CSIRO bushfire scientists. Then they set up a consultancy desk in the library and provided 'pro bono advice' about levels of potential bushfire exposure to their very appreciative classmates.

Children have really good ideas Over the last few months, I’ve been thinking a lot about climate change and wondering how Australian children are coping with the terrifying notion that this summer’s unprecedented bushfires are a sign of life to come. Bushfire education for children has never explicitly addressed the issue of climate change or the impact it will have [is having] on the frequency and severity of bushfires in Australia. Amongst the hundreds of children I’ve interviewed about bushfire over the years, there has never been any mention of climate change. I suspect this is about to change.

During the bushfire crisis, children and young people from School Strike 4 Climate have been raising money for bushfire affected communities, organising solidarity vigils, and rallying outside Scott Morrison’s Kirribilli mansion. They have stood alongside First Nations peoples, disaster survivors, health workers and other concerned citizens to demand stronger action on climate change.

When I saw them on the news, I remembered that the Australian school strike movement was founded by some Year 8 students in Castlemaine who had become deeply concerned about climate-fuelled catastrophic bushfires.

Children know things. ◆

27

◆ CLIMATE EMERGENCY Image: Inspecting a home destroyed by bushfire. Paul Clifton

Safe as Houses Climate change & the Australian Dream In the flurry of reflection and commentary prompted by summer’s catastrophic bushfires, it was suggested that climate change had finally become brutally real, that it had hit home, so to speak. While the realities of climate change – extreme weather, increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide, global warming and the steady, incremental rise in sea temperatures – have been a worldwide phenomenon for some time, the scale and ferocity of the bushfire crisis seemed an unkind reminder of the dimensions of ecological change we now face as well as the violent consequences of a broken world. Indeed, recent research shows that those either directly or indirectly affected by the fires now feel that climate change and the environment are the most pressing issues that the Government must address.

Dr Fiona Allon, University of Sydney Senior Lecturer and ARC Future Fellow, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences

28

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

CLIMATE EMERGENCY ◆

The enormity of the damage the fires wreaked upon the land is difficult to comprehend but nonetheless we still try, with new calculations of the number of animals killed or impacted by the bushfires, the hectares burnt, the houses destroyed, emerging almost daily. Yet notwithstanding the terrible loss of human and animal life, as well as the destruction of whole townships and habitats, the fires also struck at something less tangible, less material.

The great outdoors The fires have profoundly unsettled the cultural identity of white Australia and the intimate attachments – to places, to particular customs and rituals, to certain lifestyles, to house and home – that make that identity real and meaningful. In other words, Australia’s bushfire crisis has deeply disturbed many of the most dominant and taken-for-granted elements of Australian culture: ideas of home and belonging, along with the natural assumption that one can be safe and secure there; the beach and the kind of everyday pleasures that are usually associated with summer holidays on the coast; our expectations of wildlife and nature and, in particular, the bush that has long been mythologised as the great outdoors. As sociologist Danielle Celermajer has put it, 'The very idea of being "safe" … is one of the many casualties of the climate catastrophe'.

Bushfires, of course, are an annual event in Australia, and most people who live in or near the bush have long known of the need to live with the risk of fire and to take the necessary measures to avoid danger. But not only were these the worst bushfires the settler-nation has experienced, they were on a scale previously unimaginable, affecting people in a range of settings that were strikingly ordinary, and associated with domestic summer life, like camping, holidays and beachgoing, rather than natural disasters or apocalyptic conflagration.

The archive of images that was slowly built up as the disaster relentlessly unfolded day-by-day over the Christmas-New Year holiday period, images that were broadcast around the world and then shared over and over again, featured scenes that were uncanny precisely because they turned the familiar into something very strange: holidaymakers and tourists huddled together on beaches, waiting to be evacuated, when only metres away the bush was ablaze and flames inched on to the sand; campers that had been chased from their camping sites and who now sat in a long line of

slow-moving cars snaking its way up the coast and back to the relative safeness of urban areas. In these images the Australian bush was no longer a tamed space of leisure and pleasure but an unpredictable and dangerous, even malevolent, natural environment where a firestorm raged.

as the Australian Dream. And, unsurprisingly, Australians have long had a thing about their houses. Clearing the land, developing a solid foundation and building a home has functioned importantly as both a material and symbolic technology of occupation in white Australia.

These were scenes vaguely reminiscent of the 1978 Australian horror film Weekend, where the wilfully destructive white man, played by John Hargreaves, must eventually contend with an unforgiving, vengeful Nature.

The domestication of land and bush that the single-family dwelling required was a manifestation of, in a concrete, material sense as much as metaphorically, ideas of modernity and progress, and with building, quite literally, a civilised existence in a land that appeared (to European eyes) as bereft of civilisation, as terra nullius.

On the beach But perhaps some of the most unsettling images emerged from communities up and down coastal NSW and Victoria where large numbers of residents and tourists sheltered on beaches and on foreshores waiting to be rescued by emergency services. In some places, summer holiday makers, wrapped in blankets and wearing smoke-masks, gathered on wharves and boat ramps under eerily red, smoked filled skies.

And in scenes that at times seemed like a mundane Australian version of Dunkirk, families recruited small boats and runabouts – tinnies – to rescue family members and domestic pets. One iconic image showed a small boy wearing a smoke-mask and steering an aluminium powerboat, which carried his mother, brother and the family dog, away from the fire-ravaged Victorian seaside town of Mallacoota.

In Australian history, the beach, the bush and the home are mythologised spaces that have been integral to settler-colonial nation-building and the kinds of narratives that settler societies inevitably produce as stories of occupation and legitimation. But as with all mythologies, they are also contested sites whose self-evident truth often masks an inherent fragility.

The beach, for example, is one of those quintessentially Australian spaces associated with a natural healthy lifestyle (the bronzed Aussie) and with the masculinity and heroism of lifesavers, with the bravery and sacrifice of Gallipoli and with the egalitarianism of the surfing and sunbathing body. But the beach is also simultaneously the place of first contact and the violence of invasion, and the threshold which delivered smallpox and other diseases that annihilated Indigenous communities.

The castle The domestic home, likewise, is the cornerstone of what has become known

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Land grabbing, land clearing, removing bush, along with the construction of private housing and the development of suburban settlement, was an essential component of colonisation, representing moreover not just a conquest of land and territory but also a conquest of nature.

The domestic home on a cleared block of land brought nature under control, establishing the proper hierarchy of man and nature. The developed house with its cultivated garden and clearly defined boundaries was not only a marker of occupation and civilisation, then, it was also, as Katrina Schlunke puts it, a place 'where the modern defeats the natural.'

The Australian Dream and its fetish of private ownership, individual home ownership, is very much premised on this simultaneous dream of controlling nature, of bringing it under human possession and control, of claiming it as personal property and putting one’s stamp on it.

As Robert Menzies famously put it, the Australian dream of home ownership was all about claiming 'one little piece of earth with a house and a garden which is ours: to which we can withdraw … into which no stranger may come against our will.'

In Menzies’ terms, the home not only provided shelter from the weather and the harshness of the Australian climate, it was also a refuge from all kinds of strangers and strangeness, a retreat into which one could withdraw.

The phrase 'Safe as Houses' has come to epitomise this idea of the safety, solidity and stability of bricks and mortar, and not just financially but also socially and materially. Although many people may no longer remember Robert Menzies, the Australian Dream still retains much of the appeal that he ascribed to it.

From this point of view, ownership of the domestic home would provide autonomy and security, an important asset with continued over page...

29

◆ CLIMATE EMERGENCY Image: Australian landscape scarred by bushfire. Terri Sharp/pixabay

Unions must declare a climate emergency Finn Bryson, University of Sydney Union Summer intern, NTEU NSW Division

Safe as Houses: Climate change & the Australian Dream cont. ...continued from previous page which to hedge the uncertainties of the future and keep the strange at bay, even the strangeness of a changing world and a changing climate. Unfortunately, the stranger that now takes the form of 'strange weather' is no longer so obedient to the whims of 'our will' or to the boundaries of private ownership, nor does it respect the unambiguous records on the register of Torrens title.

Failure of leadership Yet what is tragically ironic is that over recent decades the Australian Government has been asking more and more from citizens and their privately-owned homes at precisely the time when it should consider other solutions, other alternatives. At all levels of governance, the home has come to be the site where practices of self-reliance and self-sufficiency can be most effectively developed, demonstrated and encouraged. Home ownership, an investment portfolio, and the steady acquisition of housing assets are now overwhelmingly viewed as necessary elements of the individualised risk management that must be developed in the face of employment insecurity,

30

precarity and the perceived unreliability (or indeed failure) of government-funded systems and social welfare services.

for the entanglements of the man-made and natural that are at the heart of a changing climate and its consequences.

Citizens are exhorted to recycle, to install solar panels and to make their homes energy and environmentally sustainable. However, a handful of large fossil fuel-based power companies still control the national grid, and even as more and more homes invest in solar panels and battery storage systems to make the energy transformation, the promise of being rewarded for feeding into the grid is being rapidly whittled away by the reduction in tariff payments and eclipsed by the risks of energy supply being increasingly borne by the home.

Losing a home in a bushfire is a traumatic event, a devastating emotional loss that will always exceed the enormity of the material devastation that is left behind, the physical wreckage and rubble that mark the event. Those dwellers who come back to the ruins, to fossick, to salvage and to mourn, return to a place that is unrecognisable as 'home'.

The home, now more than ever, may be called on to absorb risk, to provide a refuge from the vicissitudes of the environment, the turbulence of the climate, and the uncertainties of the future, when what is needed is the very reversal of an interior space closed to the dangers of 'outside'. The clear-cut divisions of modernity fail to make any sense nowadays, and will only continue to do so. Even the idea of a 'natural disaster' remains woefully inadequate as a term of description

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Perhaps at a time of climate emergencies such as the recent bushfire crisis it is paramount for us all to develop new concepts of dwelling and to forge new connections between climate, the environment and home. It is a cliché that new life rises from ruins.

But as Schlunke argues, 'With the ruin one can see the ruination of a Western (and a very Australian) ideal of conquering space with location'. In its place may emerge a more open, less defensive understanding of home as an extension of the environment rather than its limit. ◆ Dr Fiona Allon, University of Sydney

CLIMATE EMERGENCY ◆

NTEU National Council 2019 resolved to declare a climate emergency. You might ask, what is a 'climate emergency'? Why does declaring one matter? And what does it have to do with unions?

The climate emergency declaration movement began in Australia in 2016 as a formal way to demand recognition of the threat that climate change represents and acknowledgement that action taken so far has not been sufficient.

Climate emergency movement in universities Since its launch, 1,330 jurisdictions in 26 countries have declared a climate emergency. The movement has also caught on in universities, which are well-placed to inform our climate change response.

Modern universities profess to a noble dedication to solving society’s 'wicked problems'. Well, a university that fulfils this role must seriously engage with climate change as one of the most pressing wicked problems we face.

Their own carbon footprints – and those of their investment portfolios – are a substantial place to start. More importantly, though, universities train and educate the young minds who will inherit an increasingly volatile climate, and whose leadership will be crucial to mitigating and adapting to its effects. According to Seb Crawford, Sustainability Engagement Manager at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS), 'What a university uniquely can do is teaching and research, getting the word out to policymakers, and putting this stuff into the curriculum'.

As of 2020, declarations have been made at 247 higher education institutions representing over 4.5 million students – everywhere from Sweden’s Aalto University to Zayed University in Dubai. They have signed a commitment to mobilise resources for action-oriented climate change research, to deliver more environmental and sustainability education on and off-campus, and to go carbon neutral by 2030, or 2050 at the very latest.

Not all universities have shown the same enthusiasm. At the University of Wollongong (UOW), a letter submitted by NTEU Branch President Georgine Clarsen calling for the university to declare a climate

emergency was met with a dismissive response from Vice-Chancellor Paul Wellings, who retorted that the declaration 'is associated with The Greens' and that the University 'is not part of the Government nor is it aligned to any particular political party'. Nonetheless, the UOW administration proved friendly to those of a certain political ilk when it greenlit the Ramsay Centre – a philanthropic organisation whose website lists no political affiliation but features testimonials from John Howard and other prominent Liberals.

In September 2019, UTS became the first Australian university to declare a climate emergency after a sustained campaign led by staff, students and the NTEU. The NTEU UTS Branch took up the concern and energy of staff and students to put together a petition with hundreds of signatures. The petition was presented to the Vice-Chancellor and the campaign was ultimately successful, securing a declaration of climate emergency the day before the September 20 climate strike.

Does it achieve anything?

Do climate emergency declarations actually lead to meaningful action? Can they ever be more than feel-good press releases for institutions already doing their bit? At UTS, for instance, energy-saving measures, renewable energy leadership and fossil fuel divestment were already university policy before a declaration was made. This can lead some commentators to criticise emergency declarations as hollow rhetoric. However, an official declaration promotes accountability by identifying concrete targets – for example, a specified date by which the university must become carbon neutral.

Moreover, it can build momentum behind mass democratic involvement in demanding climate justice, and make universities more supportive environments for staff and students to engage in political action.

A declaration of climate emergency, on its own, will not be the silver bullet to the climate crisis. It should be seen as

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

a stepping stone towards the societal transformation we need – a transformation that can only be won by grassroots movements. A sustainable future has union values at its heart, and union activists leading the charge. NTEU members have already played a strong role in getting progressive demands into the climate strike movement: publicly owned renewables, a just transition for fossil fuel workers, and Aboriginal land and water sovereignty.

The recent explosion in climate activism also presents a huge opportunity to rebuild the strength of the labour movement. At UTS, NTEU’s engagement in climate activism coincided with a 4% increase in union membership. People engaging in climate activism are realising the value and power of collective action and returning to the labour movement.

In the words of Branch President Vince Caughley, 'Climate activism presents us with a real opportunity to win back the right to strike. Knowing what we know about the urgency and the kind of structural change required, how else are we going to force the issue other than by striking?'

On the back of the National Council’s declaration, NTEU is forming a comprehensive climate strategy using its influence in bargaining, UniSuper, university governance, and wider national advocacy. However, it is grassroots organising work at the Branch level that will really drive the change we need. Together we can build a united climate and labour movement with real power to win a better society.

Declaring a climate emergency recognises that the solutions to this wicked problem will need to be bold. In the words of Greta Thunberg, 'we have to act as if our house is on fire, because it is.' In the wake of a horrific bushfire season and a renewed Australian government commitment to fossil fuel industries, this blunt advice seems more critical than ever. ◆

31

◆ CLIMATE EMERGENCY

Stop supercharging climate change NTEU National Council in 2019 passed a resolution calling on UniSuper – the superannuation fund for workers in the higher education sector – to ‘urgently prepare a ten-year plan to transition all invested funds to be fully carbon neutral by 2030’.

In 2020, NTEU will be campaigning in earnest for UniSuper to divest from fossil fuels and provide greater transparency on the fund’s investments, both direct and indirect.

By calling on UniSuper to divest from fossil fuels, the NTEU seeks to ensure that the retirement savings of its members are not being used to underwrite a future dominated by catastrophic global heating.

By successfully targeting UniSuper, members can be satisfied that they are influencing not only the conduct of their own super fund but of other market players in Australia and internationally.

UniSuper is the fifth largest superannuation fund in Australia with a portfolio worth over $80 billion. Investment decisions by UniSuper ripple throughout the broader economy.

UniSuper is no innocent when it comes to investing in fossil fuels. Among the major holdings it discloses are large fossil fuel companies such as BHP, Woodside Petroleum, Santos, APA, Enbridge Inc, and TL Energy – many of whom are actively undermining the climate goals of the Paris Agreement.

In November 2018, UniSuper joined the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) which has over 1,000 member organisations with a combined market capitalisation of $12 trillion. The TCFD’s stated aim is for companies to issue ‘decision-useful’ disclosures, such as greenhouse gas emissions associated with investments, and outline strategies for reducing exposure to climate risks such as to reach ‘net zero’ by 2050.

UniSuper’s 2019 Climate Risk Management and Investments at UniSuper report, however, does not appear to provide detail at the level required by the TCFD. For example, a substantial proportion of UniSuper funds are managed ‘externally’ by investment managers and it is unclear whether UniSuper reveals the degree of climate-risk exposure these funds represent.

As members, it is vitally important that we have access to the information required to genuinely assess the impact of our super fund and its various investment products. UniSuper has an increasingly urgent obligation to improve in this regard.

Super funds are obliged to make decisions in the best financial interests of their members. Many have argued that fossil fuel divestment is an environmental, rather than a financial, matter. Yet, as the economic impacts of global heating become more recognised, this argument is increasingly tenuous.

In February 2020, Reserve Bank of Australia Governor, Philip Lowe, warned of investors being left with ‘stranded assets’

Unfortunately, it is not possible to get a full picture of the extent of UniSuper’s integration with the fossil fuel industry because of its opaque reporting.

UniSuper only discloses its top 20 Australian and top 20 international shareholdings. It does not fully disclose the extent of indirect investment in fossil fuels. Members should and do expect better.

32

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

because of climate change and recent events illustrate that this is certainly a major risk.

Last year, Norway’s trillion-dollar Government Pension Fund Global – the world’s largest wealth fund – announced a plan to sell off stakes in oil and gas exploration and production to reduce vulnerability to fossil fuel prices and to invest in renewable energy infrastructure projects and companies.

Blackrock, the world’s biggest asset manager, announced in 2019 that it would 'put climate change at the centre of its investment strategy' and divest from coal.

What this tells us is that the NTEU’s divestment campaign is both environmentally and financially sustainable. It seeks to protect the retirement incomes of its members and ensure that our superannuation fund is driving the changes that are needed to safeguard all of our futures.

In the coming months, NTEU members will be called on to take action to combat fossil fuel driven global heating. Keeping our superannuation fund honest is one very meaningful and practical way that higher education workers can play an important role in de-carbonising the economy and transitioning to a sustainable future. ◆ Damien Cahill, NSW Division Assistant Secretary and Vince Caughley, UTS Branch President Find out more at divestunisuper.nteu.org.au

COLUMNIST ◆ Jeannie Rea, Immediate Past President Envelope-Square jrea@vu.edu.au

OK, Boomers – step up!

When I hear the retort 'OK, Boomer', I nod along because our children are unlikely to have the opportunities many of us had.* This can, in part, be attributed to the deliberate erosion of union power.

We had trade unions and social movements that formed in the face of often violent opposition and many of us fought for decent work, against sexism, racism, homophobia and nuclear power, and for peace, justice and environmental sustainability.

But too many boomers got comfortable and let go of the fight.

A couple of years ago my daughter rang me to say that she had been too sick to go to work, but was delighted when she found she was still paid. It was her first experience of paid sick leave.

Recently, I explained to a younger colleague that I was taking a month’s holiday mid-year as I had accumulated long service leave. He did not know about long service leave, which is not surprising considering his employment experience is casual and short term contracts.

I explained that unions had won paid sick and holiday leave, as well as long service leave (LSL). I realised, as soon as I said it though, that LSL is becoming rare, as even workers in what were secure fields are now more likely to be employed precariously. And they have to fight for any paid leave. And while many employers do stick to the award and the enterprise agreement (if there is one) wage theft is endemic across the workforce.

Today we have no legal right to strike, and go through a ridiculous rigmarole to even take action during a bargaining period.

But until enough of us are prepared to withdraw our labour, we will continue to see few wins, and the ongoing erosion of our pay and conditions.

When I started working as a teacher, it was casual employment, but my expectation was that soonish I’d get an ongoing job with the attendant benefits. As a woman I was particularly pleased, as while I had no baby plans then, the education unions had won 12 weeks paid maternity leave and up to 7 years unpaid leave. Some of us had already joined up while at university, and knew we should be active union members. There were plenty of opportunities to do so. I wanted to make sure my union leaders were focused upon fighting for secure jobs for early career teachers, as ‘limited tenure’ employment was creeping in.

I quickly learned that the union would back me up when I spoke on my and colleagues' behalf. Management respected the union and were also a bit scared of us. Everyone in my work area was a member. Back then there were workplaces where you had to join the union. I had worked in ‘closed shop’ factories, and while the face of the union was the old bloke who came around collecting dues, it still felt safer in a dangerous factory. When industrial action was called, we downed tools and walked out.

Our pay was docked, but we still had our jobs. This was how collectively, unions won workplace health and safety laws.

It was a bit different in teaching, but in the end the only way to deal with intransigent management was to withdraw our labour, which we did. Many of us had been at high schools where our teachers had gone on strike for smaller classes and more teachers; for more resources for state schools; against teachers

being sacked for speaking out on controversial issues like sex education; and in support of other unionists being persecuted.

We had seen action and solidarity work.

I arrived at a my university job just as the NTEU was coming together and I was excited to be in an industry union. In unity is strength. Locally, we had pretty high membership density – you could tell because non-members were ashamed to admit it. It was also clear that management relied upon the union’s expertise in dealing with industrial matters. We still ended up on the picket line each enterprise bargaining round, but we were holding out for big wins. The union was a big presence on campus. Delegates were plentiful and respected as they walked about delivering newsletters and checking up on how we were travelling. NTEU Friday arvo drinks were the place to be.

So what happened? The effectiveness of the extremist campaign by anti-union forces to undermine our unions legislatively, politically and culturally cannot be understated. Sure well unionised industries were closing down; and ‘restructuring’ was doing in unionised jobs replacing these with precarious employment. And yes, we union activists and leaders were slow off the mark in organising in new workplaces and amongst the insecure workers in our own workplaces. But the anti-union forces from the big end of town and their allies in the Coalition and the media were/are out to get us.

Today we have low union membership and density except in emergency services, teaching, nursing and some trades. In universities, too many colleagues are wary of speaking up as we are one restructure away from redundancy. Others are hanging out for the next contract. Rarely do we walk off the job and march over to the Vice-Chancellor's office.

Over in the UK we see the solidarity of younger casually employed university staff going on strike in opposition to changes to the pension funds of secure, well paid academics – and yet most of those baby boomers are not striking for secure jobs for the next generations. Elsewhere the fight is on. In parts of the United States to France and Chile strikes are attracting workers, young and old, with students, demanding decent jobs and decent pay and action to stop the destruction of the planet.

So when I hear the put down 'OK boomer', I agree we have a lot to answer for. And it is about time we stood up alongside younger people, and we all listen and learn and unite to fight for an equal and just world. ◆ Jeannie Rea was NTEU National President 2010–2018, and is an Associate Professor at Victoria University *My OK Boomer status is not shared by most of my friends who do not have secure job stories because they are women who had babies; are Indigenous and faced discrimination; worked in poorly remunerated welfare and advocacy; got sick or injured or are just unlucky. Few women I know have much superannuation at all, and few own a home.

Image: Boomer kombi van. Oskars Sylwan/Unsplash ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

33

◆ COLUMNIST Inger Mewburn, The Thesis Whisperer M @thesiswhisperer

Working late, weekends and poolside The smell of pool chlorine reminds us of work. Both of us admit to doing emails while sitting at the local pool waiting for the kids to finish their lessons, as well as at cafés, on airplanes, waiting in queues. At least one of us does the odd email or two from the bathroom. We are academics and therefore work anywhere, anytime (maybe most of the time?).

You might be thinking ‘so far, so normal’ and it’s true: ubiquitous communication technology enables professionals like us to do their email everywhere. But our recent study of submission activity around a popular academic journal shows that it’s not just emails that get done poolside. The core business of academia: writing up research results, is also being pushed into the ‘off hours’.

mains the only British woman to win one). This is a nice example of how working on the weekend can be a great and creative experience. And we need creativity more than ever to tackle the deep problems that academics wrestle with. We are not at the forefront of fire fights or caring for people in hospitals, but we do important work that assists people in those roles to do their work more easily and with less risk to life, limb and health.

We compared the times of day and the week when academics submit papers to the British Medical Journal (BMJ)1. The famous Christmas edition of the BMJ gives space to light hearted, but serious science. Our analysis included more than 49,000 manuscript submissions and 76,000 peer reviews. We noted the time stamp on the submissions and tracked the patterns to see when people were most likely to declare their work ‘finished’ and send it in. Our analysis suggested that academics are doing plenty of research writing work during lunch breaks, after hours and on the weekend.

Weekend work can make you happy if you’re doing what you want to do, but it can make you unhappy if you’re feeling under pressure to finish a less pleasant task (e.g. marking). Perhaps academic weekdays should become more like weekends?

Universities could start by helping us re-create a quiet space during the week: let’s say on Fridays.

Interestingly, there were clear and consistent differences were between countries with respect to after hours work. Adjusting for the cultural conventions about when in the week rest days tend to fall, Chinese researchers were the most likely to work at weekends and at midnight, whereas researchers in Scandinavian countries (where there are many more ‘family friendly’ workplace policies) were among the most likely to submit during the week and the middle of the day. Of course, we can’t say when most of the work took place. Certainly chemicals were titrated, samples were cut and prepped and people were interviewed during the week, but it seemed the writing was not.

Is doing academic writing in the evenings and on the weekends necessarily a bad thing? We are conflicted. Ironically, both of us worked on our paper about weekend work on weekends, as well as a few late nights and holiday breaks. Every time we sent each other an email after 6pm, or at 10am on a Saturday morning from the pool, we noted that we were just as prone to after hours work as anyone in our data set.

However, the work didn’t feel onerous as it was something we really wanted to do – a fun side project with no deadlines. And perhaps this is the key. The background noise of administration demands and meetings goes away on the weekends. Students may continue to email us, but we feel freer to ignore those demands out of conventional hours. This makes weekends and quiet times in the evenings a great time to be creative.

Dorothy Hodgkin created the structure of insulin on a 'wonderful weekend', and this contributed to her Nobel prize (she re-

Academics avoid running face to face classes on that day anyway as students are notorious for skipping them – we should follow their lead! The university could actually switch the email system off (although we are aware that banning emails out of hours can paradoxically increase stress2). Meetings could be discouraged by making meeting rooms unbookable. The Online Learning systems could stay on, but academics could be locked out and students left alone to talk amongst themselves.

We can’t finish without noting that doing nothing on the weekend can also be useful. David Vaux made a major breakthrough after neglecting an experiment over the weekend and returning to find the cells were still alive. Academics have a great job compared with most people, and so we shouldn’t be complaining too loudly about working on the holidays, late nights and weekends.

But there is a limit. Working out of standard business hours can mean missing out on fun stuff and neglecting to properly look after ourselves. Too many of us have present in body, but not in spirit, at family events and missed important milestones. So, this Australian summer, we encourage you to drink coffee and wave at your kids during swimming lessons. Let’s find ways to stage large and small acts of rebellion you can start by writing during the week on paid time. Who knows? It might become a habit. ◆ Inger Mewburn does research on research and writes about it at thesiswhisperer.com Co-authored with Prof Adrian Barnett, School of Public Health and Social Work, QUT 1. https://www.bmj.com/content/367/bmj.l6460 2. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-50073107

Image: Working poolside. Engin Akyurt/Pixabay

34

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS ◆

OUR VOICE @ WORK & BEYOND

QUTE Conference 2020 NTEU’s Queer Unionists in Tertiary Education (QUTE) hosted a national conference, Our Voice @ Work and Beyond in Melbourne on 31 Jan–1 Feb, concluding with the Melbourne Pride March on Sunday 2 February.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

35

◆ LGBTQI+ RIGHTS

Our Voice @ Work & Beyond

QUTE caucus was established in 2002 and re-invigorated in Victoria in 2012. Its purpose is to develop networks between LGBTIQ+ members and to foster opportunities for action within the Union, the broader labour movement and our combined communities.

The 2017 national conference, Raising Our Voices, established informal networks nationally and recommended establishing LGBTIQ+ events on the Union calendar (IDAHOBIT and Wear it Purple); a Steering Committee to lead our voice; and regular communication in NTEU publications.

This year's conference was attended by delegates from almost every Branch in the country. Held in the context of divisive public comment and debate around the Federal Government’s ‘religious freedom’ legislation, and after the mammoth mobilisation of community and allies during the marriage equality campaign of

36

Above: QUTE Conference delegates. Paul Clifton

2017, the conference gave delegates the opportunity to reflect on LGBTIQ+ activism in our own work on campus.

Transgender Victoria representatives Jess Mattar and Oliver Ross shared We Deserve, a co-design project with trans, gender diverse and non-binary communities that developed short films exploring relationships. Sydney World Pride Chair Robyn Kennedy led an exploration of connections workers can make during the 2023 World Pride event in Sydney that coincides with the 45th anniversary of Mardi Gras and 30 years of the NTEU, so there is much to celebrate.

Victorian Trades Hall Assistant Secretary, Will Strack, began the conference outlining the activism of the ‘Yes’ campaign and the collective strength of unions in making lasting change. She summarised steps in this mobilisation, with a very short turn-around.

In essence, the campaign involved of a million conversations with activists, union members and the nanna across the road working together to bring about an overwhelmingly positive response to the marriage equality survey. Monash University NTEU member, Robyn Oxley, explored the intersectionality of being an Aboriginal woman who identifies as a lesbian, navigating university whiteness.

Delegates considered LGBTIQ+ issues related to university employment in discussing the research of Dr Raymond Trau and associates, Coming Out at Work: From Prejudice to Pride. Raymond’s work shines a light on the experiences of LGBTIQ+ workers in Australian workplaces and reports that less than a third of LGBTIQ+ workers are out at work.

Below, L–R: Robyn Oxley; Delegate discussion group

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS ◆

One study participant recalled his engagement being ignored by his coworkers but then being asked to contribute to a present collection for a heterosexual engagement. Another noted non-inclusive language when a colleague said 'I don’t care if you’re gay, I’ll treat you like you’re normal'. A suite of employer recommendations are included in his research.

The gender climate study at the University of Western Sydney was explored by researcher Dr Nicole Asquith who 'zoomed' into the conference from her field studies. Discrimination, harassment and violence were shown to be the experience of education and work for many LGBTIQ+ people on campus. Heterosexism and cis-sexism on campus and the response and impact of these on LGBTIQ+ staff and students was contextualised in the study.

Nearly half of the LGBTIQ+ research participants reported discrimination on campus, 28% harassment and 6% physical assault. The study showed that students were more likely to report discrimination and that classrooms were ‘hot-spots’ where discrimination occurred.

Co-Executive Director of Intersex Human Rights Australia, Toni Briffa, established that protection of bodily autonomy and choice remains a key issue for intersex people. Delegates explored and endorsed the Darlington Statement, the joint consensus statement that outlines priorities for health, employment, human rights, legal reforms and more.

Conference recommendations were discussed and agreed and will be reported to National Executive, and motions taken to 2020 National Council later this year.

These include issues of representation (maintaining our voice), organising (implementing Darlington Statement, World Pride and more) and mobilising LGBTIQ+ campaigns in the Union. ◆ David Willis, QUTE

Delegate Vox Pops Daniel Tissot, Australian Catholic University I'm glad I was able to attend the 2020 QUTE conference in Melbourne. I guess I can say that it was a great success! Loved the ideas, the crowd, the conversations and most of all the amazing speakers!

Some stuff was actually intense but just being there and un-packing all of it – now that was beyond awesome.

Suzanne Edwards, University of Adelaide What a wonderful long weekend, surrounded by like-minded people focused on advocating for LGBTIQA rights in the workplace. It was especially interesting marching and singing union songs in the Midsumma Pride March.

I am now at home organising to have a QUTE meeting with our Adelaide contingent.

Dr David Rhodes, Edith Cowan University Being located at a regional campus in WA, I often feel isolated working in the activist space, so it was refreshing and invigorating to meet with other like-minded individuals from around the country (and beyond).

As a result of the conference, I am keen to continue to advocate for LGBTIQ+ equality in our workplaces and the wider community. It inspires me to keep fighting injustice.

Find out more at nteu.org.au/qute To join the QUTE mailing list, email Dave at dwillis@nteu.org.au Below: Jess Mattar & Oliver Ross from the We Deserve project. Helena Spyrou

Jo Tilly, University of Technology Sydney The 2020 QUTE conference was an awesome opportunity to meet and catch up with some fabulous folks from across the country. NTEU activists are doing great things for the LGBTQI+ communities on their campuses and it was really exciting to share ideas about how we can make our universities more inclusive places for everyone to work.

continued over page...

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

37

◆ LGBTQI+ RIGHTS Image: Sara Rampazzo

In/Visibility on campus Sexuality & Gender Diversity @ WSU In early 2018, after three years of advocacy and development, research into the campus climate for sexuality and gender diverse staff and students at Western Sydney University (WSU) was published.

The report documents a landmark study into the experiences of sexuality and gender diverse (SGD) staff and students, as well as cisgender and heterosexual (cishet) staff and students’ perceptions and attitudes to sexuality and gender diversity on campus.

Nicole Asquith, Western Sydney University Associate Professor of Policing & Criminal Justice, School of Social Sciences & Psychology

38

Tania Ferfolja, Western Sydney University Associate Professor, School of Education

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS â—†

Building on important qualitative work undertaken by colleagues in WA and Victoria, this research used a mixed methods approach to quantitatively map discrimination, harassment and violence at WSU, exploring the approaches taken by the university to create a more inclusive working and learning environment, and consider the gaps in policy and practice.

This research was funded and endorsed by the Executive of WSU, and was supported in large part due to the poor WSU results documented in the LGBTIQ Uni Guide. As a university of the western suburbs, WSU has had a long commitment to diversity in the workplace and in learning; however, this study found that while cultural and linguistic diversity is valued (76%), the same cannot be said for sexuality and gender diversity (65%).

A total of 2,395 staff and students participated in the online survey. Of these 412 identify as LGBTIQ+, 18% as sexuality diverse and 2.7% as gender diverse.

A critical finding from the research was the level of fear of heterosexism and cissexism. Fear of discrimination, harassment, and violence, in itself, affects SGD staff and students significantly. Of note, 53% and 38% of our SGD respondents felt vulnerable to prejudice from strangers, and people they know, respectively.

Fifty-five per cent avoided doing some things because of possible prejudice or discrimination, and 46% believe that they are safer if they hide their sexuality or gender identity.

All participants were asked about the number of incidents they had experienced, witnessed and intervened in the last month. Based on these results and extrapolated to the whole WSU population, 456 incidents of SGD discrimination, harassment, and violence occur each month, which represents approximately 5,500 incidents each year. These experiences vary from student exclusion in assessment group work, to name calling and hate speech, to discrimination and harassment, physical and sexual violence.

Our SGD respondents were asked about their experience of harassment, discrimination, and violence in the last 12 months, since arriving at WSU, and their most significant incident (Figs 1 & 2).

However, when asked about their most significant incident, these figures are skewed to discrimination (42%) and harassment/bullying (32%). It is important to note that while 8% of SGD participants had indicated they had experience physical/sexual violence at some time since arriving at WSU, only 1% noted this violence

18%

When asked about the possible motives for these incidents, respondents identified heterosexism (60%), transphobia (21%), biphobia (13%), and/or cissexism (21%). However, other intersectional factors were identified, such as racism (8%), religion (8%), and ableism (6%).

40%

In the last 12 months

Since arriving at WSU

Fig 1: Timing of significant incidents Discrimination

31%

Harassment/ bullying

26%

Verbal/textual hostility

13%

Physical/sexual violence

8%

Long term effects

Fig 2: Types of incidents as their most significant incident. Perhaps within the learning and work environment, it is discrimination and harassment that has the most significant and long term consequences.

In relation to their most significant incidents, 48% noted that it lasted 12 months or more, or was still ongoing at the time of the survey. The majority of these incidents occurred on the home campus (Fig. 3). In 58% of these incidents, the respondent was with someone else; it was witnessed by a small or large group of bystanders (61%), but that only in 26% of these cases did the bystanders intervene.

28% Class/tutorial/ 24% lecture Home campus

On the way to university

13%

Fig 3: Location of incidents Under 25

52%

One

21%

Number of perpetrators

39%

Age of perpetrator Two

60%

Over 30

56%

Unknown to the victim

The majority of perpetrators of these most significant incidents were unknown to the victims and overwhelmingly involved only one perpetrator (Fig. 4).

Men

Women

52% 24% 24% Gender of perpetrator/s

Both

Their fear of possible discrimination and harassment, when combined with their lived experiences of heterosexism and cissexism limits the opportunities for SGD staff and students, and creates psycho-social affects that cause distress, worry, anxiety and depression. In addition to the 33% of respondents noting psychological distress as the consequence of their most significant incident of heterosexism and cissexism, participants also noted that it impacted on their sociality (20%), their productivity (14%), and made them modify their behaviour (16%). Importantly, though, for 8% of SGD staff and students, these incidents of heterosexism and cissexism made them more political and active in seeking change.

Bystander intervention A critical finding of this research was the willingness and capacity of bystanders to intervene. While 75% of all respondents (SGD & cishet) indicated that they would be willing to intervene in incidents of heterosexism and cissexism, in only 26% of most significant incidents did bystanders intervene. This lack of intervention may be due to a lack of understanding of what constitutes heterosexism/cissexism, and/or a lack of knowledge about how to intervene safely. In either case, this provides universities with a clear action plan.

From existing research on sexual violence against women, we know that bystander intervention is critical to better outcomes. Developing the skills and capacities of our staff and student populations to recognise and intervene safely may provide a pathway to creating more inclusive and tolerant universities.

It is our hope that this study can be replicated across Australian universities.

Not only will this provide the NTEU with a clear illustration of the campus climate for sexuality and gender diverse staff and students, it will enable us to better understand the local and regional differences for NTEU members who identify as sexuality and/or gender diverse. â—†

Fig 4: Perpetrators

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 â—† MARCH 2020

39

◆ LGBTQI+ RIGHTS Image: Mario Gogh

Who's out at work?

Out at Work: From Prejudice to Pride, a research project conducted jointly by the Diversity Council Australia and RMIT University and published in late 2018, presents evidence about what it means for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex and queer (LGBTIQ+) to be out at work and what employers can do to make workplaces positive experiences for all workers.

Quote-left There is often a misconception in the straight community that ignoring is the same as accepting. But pretending not to see a difference is choosing not to understand difference, and heteronormativity becomes the default.

Quote-left Are you married’ is always a difficult

Quote-left I’m extremely feminine so don’t appear to be queer. Everybody always says, 'Wow! You don’t look gay at all!'

And that’s so hurtful, because there is no set look.

David Willis, NTEU Victorian Division Organiser

40

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

question. I’ll say, ‘Well I have a partner’.

And they’ll say’ What’s her name’ Then I’ll say, ‘It’s a he actually.’ And then there’s an awkward silence.

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS ◆

Why does being out at work matter?

Concealing compromises wellbeing.

LGBTIQ+ employees who are not out to everyone at work are: • Twice as likely to feel down as employees who are out to everyone at work.

• 45% less likely to be satisfied with their job.

Being out at work drives performance and job satisfaction. LGBTIQ+ employees who are out to everyone at work are: • 50% more likely to innovate than workers who are not out to everyone.

• 35% more likely to work highly effectively in their team.

• 28% more likely to provide excellent customer service/client service.

What enables being out at work?

LGBTIQ+ people in organisations with strong LGBTIQ+ leadership were one and a half times as likely as workers with none, to be out at work. It’s more than policies, though. Workplace culture counts.

LGBTIQ+ inclusion is a relatively new component of workplace diversity and inclusion despite anti-discrimination legislation providing legal protections for workers of diverse genders and sexualities for years. All workers deserve to feel treated equally at work, with dignity and respect. One research participant commented that his engagement to a same sex partner went unnoticed in his workplace but he was expected to contribute money to an engagement present for a heterosexual colleague. Another was told by a manager, 'I don’t mind if you’re gay.

I’ll treat you like you’re normal.'

Changing workplace culture to reflect inclusive practices has broken down some barriers in the workplace for LGBTIQ+ workers but Out at Work provides evidence on how important genuine inclusion is for LGBTIQ+ workers to stay safe, to feel welcome and to contribute their best at work.

Research results Staggering research results show that while 74% of LGBTIQ+ respondents said that it was important to them to be able to be out at work, only 32% were out to everyone with whom they work. Just 14% of workers with more than one LGBTIQ+ attribute (e.g. they may be transgender

Quote-left My workplace is very inclusive so I feel comfortable being out at work. It works for me and for my organisation, as I don’t waste energy and time mentally dancing around each interaction wondering, ‘Do I avoid it completely or risk coming out (yet) again?’ But I’m very conscious that I’m one of the fortunate few. For many LGBTIQ+ people bringing their full selves to work is just not realistic as the consequences are just too costly. and gay) were out to everyone at work.

16% of bisexual workers were out to everyone at work and 28% of trans or gender diverse workers are out to no-one.

There’s work to be done.

Genuine and bold leadership is critical to foster this culture. The researchers offered six solutions, or ‘talents’, for creating inclusive work cultures that enable real choices about being out at work.

Researchers drew on the work experiences of 1,600 LGBTIQ+ workers shared in focus groups, an online survey and extensive literature review. Their work sought to answer two questions:

Each 'talent’ offered by the researchers is accompanied by strategies to achieve it.

Many of these are obvious, but not that common in workplaces:

1. Why do LGBTIQ+ individuals share or conceal their LGBTIQ+ identity or status at work?

2. What can Australian organisations do to make their workplace a safe and inclusive place for LGBTIQ+ workers to be themselves?

The research found that a large proportion of LGBTIQ+ workers are still not comfortable being themselves at work.

Homophobia, biphobia, transphobia and intolerance of gender diversity is the lived reality for many Australian workers. Workplace invisibility, harassment, gender misrepresentations, language that excludes and quiet allies in workplaces are experiences reported by the research participants.

The research found that concealing diverse gender and sexuality in the workplace compromises individual wellbeing and affects performance.

The study found that LGBTIQ+ employees who are not out to everyone at work are twice as likely to feel down compared with employees who are out to everyone at work, and 45% less likely to be satisfied with their job. LGBTIQ+ employees who are out to everyone at work, the study found, are 50% more likely to innovate than workers who are not out to everyone, 35% more likely to work highly effectively in their teams and 28% more likely to provide excellent customer service.

1. Making LGBTIQ+ visible. Celebrating ‘diversity’ days for LGBTIQ+ people, rainbow flags, Pride and Ally groups, gender neutral bathrooms and being visible in public 2. Understanding diversity of LGBTIQ+ people. Thinking about inclusion from three spheres: sexual orientation, gender identity/expression and intersex issues, recognising that people may have more than one LGBTIQ+ attribute.

3. Having courage to ‘call it’. Make complaints process clear and fair, have zero tolerance for sexual harassment, be bold and call out homophobia, biphobia, transphobia, develop common understanding about language use.

4. Using inclusive language. Use resources to help be inclusive, review workplace forms, use correct pronouns.

5. Disrupting assumptions. Conduct inclusive training, don’t out someone without their permission, know that LGBTIQ+ people may also be parents.

6. Being in it together. Work collaboratively with LGBTIQ+workers but don’t speak on their behalf, allies should include senior leaders (be in it together).

While NTEU members proudly contribute to making workplaces positive places to be for their LGBTIQ+ colleagues many will be surprised to learn that university campuses remain workplaces that are not always safe or welcoming for LGBTIQ+ staff. ◆

Six talents for creating inclusive work cultures The researcher’s concluded that while workplace policies and strategies recognising the specific needs of and sometimes just the existence of LGBTIQ+ workers are important it’s workplace culture that counts.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Quote-left It’s always the same people who have to point things out. We need to recognise that the burden has to be shared by allies.

41

◆ LGBTQI+ RIGHTS Image: Chiesa di Sant'Andrea de Valle, Rome. Chris Orr

Faith no more Religious Freedom Bills give churches the freedom to discriminate On 10 December 2019, the Attorney-General’s Department published a second exposure draft of the contentious Religious Freedom Bills. Originally released in September 2019, the first exposure draft was a package of three draft Bills, which the Government described collectively as the ‘Religious Freedom Bills’– the Religious Discrimination Bill 2019 (Cth), the Religious Discrimination (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2019 (Cth) and the Human Rights Legislation Amendment (Freedom of Religion) Bill 2019 (Cth).

Dr Terri MacDonald, NTEU Policy & Research Officer

42

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

LGBTQI+ RIGHTS ◆

From bad to worse Although the Government claimed that the Bills were a necessary defence of any potential threats to religious belief and practice, the first exposure drafts generated considerable criticism and disapproval, from both supporters and critics of the proposal to legislate religious freedom. After going back to the drawing board, the Government’s second exposure drafts were supposed to address the various criticisms which highlighted the flaws in the legislation.

In reality, the second drafts either ignored or even exacerbated the many problems with the Bills, making it clear that the intended purpose was not to protect religious freedom, but to legislatively enshrine the right of religious individuals and institutions to discriminate on the basis of religious belief.

Affect on LGBTQI+ communities NTEU’s submissions to the various drafts of the legislation heavily criticised their impact on employment law and other forms of anti-discrimination laws (particularly in relation to LGBTQI+ communities and women).

We also outlined our concerns that the scope of the proposed legislation was excessively broad, particularly in the extension of rights of religious freedoms beyond that of natural persons to corporations and other entities, and that the Bill’s allowance for the refusal of public services based on religious beliefs, including medical services, had human rights implications. In terms of higher education, our submissions also examined the implications of the proposed legislation on academic freedom.

One particular issue of concern is the proposed right of ‘statement of belief’, which effectively allows an individual to make statements or comments that can insult, offend, ridicule, discriminate or even intimidate, for any reason, provided that there is a ‘religious motivation’ to do so.

The benchmark to qualify as a ‘religious’ statement of belief only requires the individual to find one other person in their religion who agrees with their statement, and would over-ride all existing state, territory and federal anti-discrimination laws, including the various Acts that prohibit discrimination based on sex, race and age. Thus, in practice, this provision

would allow an employer to state that they do not believe women are suited to positions of leadership, or would allow a doctor to tell a patient with a disability that their disability is a form of punishment by God, or allow a teacher to tell a young student who is dealing with their sexual identity that they are sinful and must repent.

Extreme discrimination While this ‘statement of belief’ is of concern, when taken in tandem with other provisions, the true nature of extreme discrimination that these Bills would allow becomes evident.

This is because the provisions that allow religious affiliated organisations, including commercial entities and charities, to discriminate against workers and individuals on the grounds of religious belief and practice doesn’t just go to who an organisation chooses to employ or terminate (which is in itself constitutes grounds to reject the Bills), but also to conditions such as promotions and career advancement, training opportunities and even wage increases.

This arises both from the proposed legislation permitting employers to ‘give preference’ to workers based on religious grounds, which, combined with the ‘statement of belief’ could be used to discriminate, punish and intimidate workers who are not ‘given preference’, including those who would seek to exercise their industrial rights. Importantly, the legislation’s broad terms don’t define the nature of such ‘preferences’ and as such can cover any number of situations.

Thus, to give examples, an employer may choose to privilege a male employee over a female co-worker by giving the male employee a promotion, on the basis of a ‘religious belief’ that men are intellectually superior, and give that explanation as a ‘statement of belief’. In another example, an employer could tell a LGBTQI+ worker that they will not be given a pay rise until they ‘repent’ for their sexual orientation.

protect vulnerable communities, groups and individuals from discrimination, but it may also result in complaints made in a vexatious manner.

Specifically, in the case of universities, such allegations could be used to undermine academic freedom and to target the work of individual researchers and academics (e.g. those working around medical advances in human reproduction and controls, or in sexual health, or in gender identity).

Perversely, other discrimination provisions in the Bills may remove the right of some professional accrediting bodies to refuse professional recognition of teaching institutions that choose, on religious grounds, to not teach established and important components of courses (e.g. termination of pregnancy).

This would include the health professions such as medicine, nursing, psychiatry and psychology, for which the accrediting bodies perform an important role in ensuring the quality and integrity of the Australian health system.

Fundamental flaws There are other numerous problems with the Bills, but all go to the same, fundamental flaw. While the Government claims that the Bills are intended to address gaps in protections against religious discrimination, the NTEU contends that they will instead have the exact opposite effect, by allowing more extreme and divisive acts of discrimination to be perpetuated, without recourse for the victims of discrimination.

Overall, the legislation – in both the original and revised forms – will worsen people’s right to equality, and health care, and promote greater discrimination, not only with vulnerable groups, but with other religious groups.

These Bills must be rejected, in their entirety. ◆

Undermining academic freedom Another issue with the legislation is that it could allow a religious body to lodge an allegation of discrimination, against either an individual or another body, on the basis of religious belief or activity. Not only is this contrary to current anti-discrimination laws that are intended to

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

43

â—† PRIVATISATION

The surreptitious infiltration of private interests in public education Pearson Education Australia at the University of Newcastle In recent times, highly visible instances of the private interests infiltrating Australian public universities, like Ramsay Centres, have been critiqued for posing a threat to the autonomy and integrity of our higher education system. Also troubling are the less visible ways private interests are being ensconced into the fabric of public tertiary education.

Elizabeth Adamczyk, University of Newcastle Human Geography, School of Environmental and Life Sciences; Economics, Newcastle Business School

44

I am a casual academic, Committee Member of the NTEU Newcastle Branch, and a member of the National Tertiary Casuals Committee (NTCC).

I write these words on the un-ceded lands of the Awabakal people. These views are my own.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 â—† MARCH 2020

PRIVATISATION ◆

At the University of Newcastle (UoN) in Semester 2, 2018 the substantive content of some first-year courses delivered through face-to-face classes in the Newcastle Business School (NBS), including Microeconomics, was contracted to an external private company – Pearson Education Australia. Pearson offers ‘digital courseware’ in areas including business, teaching, social sciences, nursing, anatomy and physiology, science and maths.

Pearson provides content, exercises, homework questions, and exams delivered via the company’s online platform that is integrated into a university’s own online platform: in their words, a holistic ‘solution’ that 'unlocks benefits for students and educators'. Pearson markets their courseware as serving ‘the needs of students’, and ‘saving time and cost’.

Alongside UoN, the University of the Sunshine Coast, Monash, Flinders, and undisclosed tertiary institutions including in Western Australia have each established commercial agreements with Pearson to provide courseware.

Commoditising components of public tertiary education As tertiary education has been commoditised, its electronic delivery has taken on the characteristics of product exchange in a global marketplace. In 2015 in the USA ‘e-learning’ was a $107 billion USD ‘industry’. By 2025, it is predicted to triple to $325 billion USD. In Australia the commodification of online education is an emerging venture led by what the NTEU calls ‘its largest player’ Pearson Australia, a subsidiary of Pearson Global with the somewhat lofty aspiration to become 'the Netflix of education'.

Without recognising that the marketisation of tertiary education is structured around the profit-seeking and competitive imperatives of university managements we run the risk of falsely blaming private companies – such as Pearson, Ramsay, or Navitas – solely for the corrosive dimensions of the commercialisation of education. Through agreements with these private companies, entrepreneurial university managements are authorising the presence of private interests to guide curriculum in public institutions.

Benefits or costs?

The incentive to ‘save time’ for teachers using these resources is clear. Pearson can provide teaching slides, assessment items, homework, and exams. In this way, the upfront costs and labours of developing the information contained in these resources (and the supporting technol-

ogies) are shouldered by the third-party company rather than academic staff. Still, the decision to use Pearson courseware at UoN seemed to be made by management – rather than in consultation with academic staff delivering this course.

Such a choice risks fostering malaise and constrains autonomy.

Its ambiguous terms remained unquestioned by students. Concerningly, the commercial agreement and its contents were not transparently communicated to staff teaching the course, nor clearly disclosed online on the university's website

Using third-party class, homework, and assessment content also removes ownership. Academic staff simply become intermediaries in the classroom, connecting the online content provided by Pearson to the student. Students could access this courseware in any place they can access a device, which could lead UoN to deliver these courses solely online in the future.

The erosion of academic integrity and critical intellectual inquiry in ‘public’ higher education through sub-contracting course content is not isolated. In the USA, Pearson has enjoyed a chequered history of testing problems, contract fails, and lawsuits. Yet, many of the ‘efficacy reports’ that Pearson publishes on their website as exemplars of their offerings to persuade university decision-makers of the benefits in using their ‘digital courseware’, draw examples from the USA.

Accountability and risk Academic staff at UoN delivering Pearson coursework encountered repeated freezes and logouts in the online platforms.

With accountability unclear, the experience of a number of staff teaching the course was that neither Pearson nor UoN Management purchasing the content provided effective pre-emptive nor reactive support to equip academic staff to manage electronic failures. Students of course do not necessarily differentiate between teaching staff, Pearson sales people, or UoN managers. When problems arise at the coalface in the classroom, the staff in front of students bear responsibility.

A Pearson ‘sales representative’ did advise UoN academic staff if they encountered absent, confusing, unsubstantiated, or other problematic content to simply ‘fix’ the content in Pearson’s online platform. This advice ironically came to UoN staff teaching a course with concepts including how profit-seeking private companies seek to maximise revenue by minimising their cost of production.

As management in public universities gift private companies the labours and knowledges of their own staff, to (re) develop Pearson resources, this enables Pearson to progress at minimal cost to the company. Not only are academic staff being arguably rendered redundant, universities are themselves actively building the conditions to be pushed out of this education 'marketplace'.

Privacy concerns in these commercial interests are also rife. Operating via their own online platform that can be integrated into the courses of a public institution, Pearson requested students and academic staff sign a 17-page, 8,000 word contract to access their courseware. This contract also gave Pearson permission to mine ‘Personally Identifiable Information’.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

A questionable standard

Private interests have also penetrated into other government-provided education in Australia. Pearson holds a $41.6 million contract to deliver Naplan.

Pearson also delivers the ‘Pearson Test of English Academic’: a computer-based test of English used for university admission and immigration purposes. By engaging private companies to deliver education in a capitalised marketplace, public bodies like universities and governments allow them to also shape the terms on which individuals are able to progress through education, and enter our country.

Questioning a status quo Sub-contracting to the private sector arguably enables profiteering decision making that puts finances over the interests of quality and pedagogies. At UoN, sub-contracting to Pearson has occurred concurrently to increased tuition fees, reduced course resourcing, increased executive remuneration, and building a sector-leading surplus. As an active choice in the strategic use of resources by managements, out-sourcing education needs to continue to be interrogated. At ANU for example, the Enterprise Agreement requires contracting and labour hire be used only for activities that cannot be met from existing staff resources.

The practical effect of normalising practices like this is that the quasi-private dimensions of ‘public’ education become accepted. While neoliberalism seems to have become the master-signifier of the tertiary education system, we need to continue to interrogate the privatised conditions being established in our public institutions. As Tronto notes, the neoliberalisation of the university is neither normal nor invincible. ◆

45

◆ COLUMNIST Pat Wright, Emeritus Professor of Education, University of Adelaide Envelope-Square patrite@me.com

Liberals’ digital ascendancy The Review of Labor’s 2019 Federal Election Campaign, chaired by Dr Craig Emerson and Jay Weatherill, provides a comprehensive analysis of the many factors which led to Labor’s defeat at the hands of the Liberals and their associates. A key factor which has gone almost unnoticed was Labor’s digital campaign, which had been superior, but by 2019 it was inferior to that of the Coalition and its allies.

As the Review found: 'Labor faces an urgent need to dramatically improve its digital campaigning capability… Labor’s digital campaign needs to be more agile and effective in countering disinformation on digital platforms of its political rivals', This 'countering disinformation' reveals the dual nature of digital campaigning – the difference between public social media postings and clandestine targeted sledging. Social media postings can range from over-statement, exaggeration, misrepresentation, distortion, denial and outright lying or all of the above – and need no Party authorisation. Unofficial volunteers can invent dozens of fake IDs on various social media platforms and let rip. Of course, this is easier with negative messages than with positive messages, and when sprayed publicly across the entire platform.

Such twitterstorms can be dismissed and sometimes even countered with the correct information, but when the disinformation is targeted to a particular demographic or sent in a direct message, even the most vigilant social media monitor will find it very difficult to know that the misleading messaging is even occurring, let alone counter it. A great advantage of targeting is the ability to direct messaging away from the politically-engaged, thus keeping one’s rivals in the dark as to what one is up to, and tailoring the message to those who do not support either of the major parties, now the largest group of voters and closer to a majority than either of the major parties.

The demographic research which enables targeting is invaluable for digital campaigning. The Review therefore recommends that 'The National Secretary should commence a research procurement process before the end of 2019… and Labor’s research program should inform its campaign strategy independent of day-to-day tactical demands and… should deliver a set of strategic principles that guide the next campaign'. The short series of Labor Values speeches by Anthony Albanese suggests that this part of the Review, at least, is being implemented.

Labor’s digital campaign, however, suffered from 'the lack of digital literacy within Labor’s senior ranks' and the consequent lack of a 'digital first' strategy – the digital campaign being merely a distribution mechanism for messages composed for other media. Digital natives, then, were not spoken to in their own language.

The Coalition, on the other hand, ran a clearly superior digital campaign. The Liberal Party Review of the 2019 Federal Election Campaign, chaired by Arthur Sinodinos and Steven Joyce, recommended 'further development of the Party’s digital campaign' and that 'the Federal Secretariat engage with polling companies between now and the next election to learn and apply new techniques and best practice to maximise the accuracy of the Party’s quantitative research for the next election'.

They may have dropped the American i360 app (previously outlined in this column), but they certainly understand the importance of its functions.

The recommendations of this Review include the setting up of 'a small and informal grouping headed by the Federal Deputy Director to update its campaigning methods in inner-city seats in Melbourne and Sydney'. The Federal Deputy Director then was Sir Lynton Crosby’s protégé, Isaac Levido, who was widely credited as the digital mastermind (along with New Zealander digital content experts Sean Topham and Ben Guerin) behind the digital campaign which won Boris Johnson and his Conservatives their historically massive majority in December 2019.

Dominic Cummings, digital architect of the Leave campaign which gave Boris Brexit, and now Chief Adviser to PM Johnson, once said that Isaac Levido was '100 times' as good as he himself at digital campaigning.

Certainly, someone in the camp of the Coalition and their allies had some digital smarts during the May 2019 campaign in Australia. Instance the speed and ferocity with which the Labor policy on electric cars was catastrophised into 'Shorten will take away our utes' and 'Labor will destroy the weekend' – initially surreptitiously targeted to all owners of Toyota HiLux and Ford Ranger utes in Queensland. Or the manic lies about 'Labor’s Death Taxes' in graphic memes on social media platforms.

In the 2016 election, Labor outdid Liberals on social media. In the 2019 election, Liberals outdid Labor in digital campaigning and Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party (UAP) outdid Labor in media campaigning, both in size and strategy. The $83,681,442 which Palmer donated to attack Bill Shorten and keep Labor out of power was by far the biggest donation in Australian political history – and it was successful, despite UAP not winning a single seat. For the foreseeable future, Palmer can knock on the door of any Minister of the Government and be made welcome.

Palmer’s media strategy was very efficient. Aimed at the growing number of politically disengaged, it included billboards and a tsunami of mass media spots of mounting negativity towards Shorten and Labor, thus confirming their contempt for politics and politicians, and keeping them uninformed and vulnerable to the last advertising slogan they heard. They dash through the political supermarket, ignoring all the goods for sale, and make an impulse buy at the check-out on their way to the politics-free zone for another three years. ◆ Pat Wright is a Foundation Life Member of NTEU, a former President of the Adelaide Branch, former President of UACA and Head of Labour Studies at Adelaide with a lifetime interest in the labour movement's use of ICTs.

Image: Neil Soni/Unsplash

46

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

DELEGATES ◆

Kate Mattingly

Library Officer and NTEU Delegate, University of South Australia I became an NTEU delegate for the Library at UniSA because I am not afraid to speak my mind. I believe that without a voice, employees will not be treated fairly. I have always been an advocate for unions, and I feel with the present government in this country unions are more important than ever.

I was spurred into action after UniSA Library Management changed the Flexi Time guidelines in November 2018, without consulting staff. Prior to this change, staff managed their own flexi time but now staff can no longer accrue Flexi time without making a prior arrangement with their manager. We were told, after the change was made, that it was because people were abusing the system. I contacted the NTEU about this at the time and ended up becoming a delegate.

Currently, I am involved in working with colleagues in relation to Higher Education Officer level 4 (HEO4) Library staff. Library Management made changes last year to the HEO5 Position Description without consulting staff. They decided that the essential criteria for HE05 Library Officers would now require tertiary qualifications or evidence of working towards completion of tertiary qualifications in Information Management or a related discipline.

Previously, the essential criteria included equivalent skills and knowledge as an alternative to qualifications. Management had removed this criterion, meaning that HEO4 staff such as myself, and at least 20 others, would not be eligible to apply for HEO5 positions. I have more than thirty years’ experience in the library at UniSA and I studied for six years to gain a Library Technician qualification, but this is no longer recognised here. The changes made to the Position Description mean that I and my HEO4 colleagues could no longer apply for HEO5 positions in the library.

There was no career path for HEO4 staff and those who retire or resign are replaced by HEO5 staff, often recruited from outside the organisation.

I contacted the UniSA Branch of the NTEU with my concerns, and together we decided to campaign to have the Position Description changed. We also asked that a program of development be implemented, allowing HEO4 staff a similar training scheme in place of Graduate Library Officers. Graduate Library Officers train across different areas of the Library, such as Academic Services, Cataloguing and Copyright.

The NTEU contacted Library management proposing a meeting to discuss the matter, however, this was declined. We received a response from management in mid-November last year saying the Position Description would be amended. However, a training scheme would not be offered. This was a small win, but we will keep fighting for the training scheme.

I was overwhelmed by the number of colleagues willing to sign a petition we had started, including several HEO5 staff and Graduate Library Officers. I am hoping this campaign will encourage more of my fellow skilled and dedicated librarians to join the NTEU, as without the solidarity of backing one another up with collective action, these changes are unlikely to happen.

In fact, without unions, I believe most organisations will downgrade employees' working conditions. I would encourage all employees to become members of a union. If you feel strongly about the wellbeing of your colleagues, I urge you to become a delegate. It can be difficult but rewarding. The more voices we have the more we will be heard. ◆ Find out more at nteu.org.au/delegates

NATIONAL TERTIARY EDUCATION UNION

Become an NTEU

Delegates

Delegate!

Delegates are a vital part of the NTEU, maintaining visibility, supporting recruitment & building the strength of the Union.

If you’re interested in becoming a Delegate in your work area, contact your Branch today.

D E L E G AT E S . N T E U. O R G . AU

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

47

◆ DELEGATES

Sylvia Klonaris

VET Staff Coordinator and NTEU Delegate, Charles Darwin University I have received a lot of support from the NTEU over the years and I have been an active union member to support others who receive unfair treatment from their employer.

I am a feminist and passionate about women’s issues such as: equity in the workplace, unequal pay, lack of promotions, lack of professional development, restrictions to reclassifications, workplace bullying, workplace violence and excessive workloads. Additionally, as a professional employee, I have noticed the lack of career opportunities.

I decided to contribute and fight to improve our conditions by being more active in the Union.

The Industrial Officer suggested I attend a delegates meeting.

He could see how passionate I was to help people and indicated this would be the place to do it, this provided me the opportunity to help others on work related matters.

I made suggestions at that first meeting. Lolita, the then NT Division Secretary asked me, 'so what can you do about it?' and it all began there!

Janet Sincock the Vice-President General Staff and Women’s Action Committee Representative then asked me to be proxy for her to attend a Conference in Adelaide for General Staff in 2013.

I came back with ideas for the Division to campaign for better entitlements and what we can do for our next bargaining round.

I valued the solidarity within the NTEU, it gave me reason to do more within the Division.

Charles Darwin University (CDU) are currently undergoing a review with more planned restructures to come. CDU’s proposal will potentially cause job losses and the proposed restructure will have a negative impact on our students and staff. CDU is one of the largest employers in the Territory and this will also affect the economy if staff are made redundant.

'Save our Jobs' is the NTEU campaign. A petition was established for people to sign in support of the staff and call on an independent assessment of the current VET change proposal.

Exciting moments in this campaign have been our capacity to successfully put a hold on the restructure and save some jobs. A dispute was issued with the Fair Work Commission. It felt like a

win, for a short period and some jobs were saved following the staff feedback to the VC. As a delegate in this campaign, I am challenged by the resistance I encounter from management when we ask them account for their actions, to offer commitment to solutions and to respond.

It is important to take action to address issues affecting our members. Taking part in a rally or strike means standing up for our rights and it demonstrates to our members that we stand united to obtain better work entitlements to get what we want and save our jobs.

If you want to make a change or difference in the workplace, this is the place to be heard. You are appreciated and the reward is knowing that you have done good for others, which is amazing!

You build friendships and stand up for your rights in solidarity. If you believe in democracy, then be part of the Union Power in the workplace level. ◆ Sylvia Klonaris is an NTEU delegate, NT Division Vice-President General Staff, Women’s Action Committee General Staff Representative and UniSuper Standing Committee Member (General Staff) Find out more at nteu.org.au/delegates Above: Sylvia Klonaris MC'ing the CDU Bluestocking Week event in 2019.

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 48

More info at nteu.org.au/traveltowork

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

COLUMNIST ◆ Sharn Riggs, National Secretary TEU M @nzteu

Farewell from over the Ditch After three decades of leading unions, and dozens of trips across the Ditch, there is a lot to reflect on when it comes to unions, tertiary education, and trans-Tasman rivalries.

Retiring from union work does give me pause to reflect on all that I have been part of and the solidarity between our unions.

Then there’s the push against casualisation, an insidious creeping term and actions which put workers in dire positions.

What is clear is that the attacks on unions, universities, and anything to do with the public good are sadly global.

I see with pride the NTEU work in the SuperCasual space and in calling out universities for letting 60% of teaching work be driven to those in casualised work.

It’s also clear that the answer to growing inequality and hardship both here and in your neck of the woods, is to strengthen unionism.

There is no doubt that both NZTEU and NTEU have been fighting the good fight.

There is the push for greater indigenous rights and the importance of getting our houses in order. For TEU this has meant the development of Te Koeke Tiriti, a framework for action based on our crucial tiriti relationship between Māori and tau iwi (nonMāori). And both our unions having a commitment to ensuring indigenous business comes first in all meetings.

There have been the ongoing battles against privatisation and managerialism which have eaten away at TAFE and polytechnic provision, and put arbitrary measuring ahead of core university business of being the critic and conscience of society.

In 2017 we managed to inspire 2,000 people to speak out against moves to give more public funding to for-profit companies. And in 2020 we have seen the renationalisation of vocational education with the creation of a single network where collaboration (not competition) is the order of the day.

In terms of trans-Tasman rivalries, we are very happy to be leading the charge toward education which is accessible, inclusive, and provided no matter where you live.

We weren’t so happy about being the first to go deep into smashing union rights in the 1990s. For a retiring National Secretary, the wounds created by the 1990 Employment Contracts Act will never be forgotten. Some unions just disappeared almost overnight.

The rest of us were left reeling and having to fight rear guard actions.

Sadly even the progressive governments who have been in power since have failed to really roll back the anti-union legislation.

This reality makes it even more important for unions to speak up and stand up for workers’ rights as fundamental parts of a good society. It is with pride that I reflect on the amazing fight put up by workers together.

The push against work rights legislation in Australia; taking to the streets to push for fair pay in NZ.

It’s immensely important here in NZ to be part of a push to increase the work rights of contractors. The campaign led by the NZ Council of Trade Unions speaks volumes to the hundreds of workers in the tertiary education sector who have been deemed to be contractors when they are actually employees.

Similarly we continue to fight as do you to ensure that those on short fixed term agreements are shifted into good, decent, permanent work.

Three decades have also offered lots of moments fighting for equal rights for women, for the Rainbow community, and so many others.

As a recent participant in the QUTE conference, it was wonderful to be in such a vibrant and dynamic space. Rights for the LGBTIQ community have been hard fought for and need much more work.

In New Zealand, TEU is proud to see our work on seeking greater inclusion and accessibility to tertiary education has included the development of a Tertiary Education Strategy that speaks volumes about tackling racism, sexism, homophobia, and more.

It is important that we do more to make our unions and tertiary institutions better places to be for all.

Unions certainly need to keep up their work on gender equity. It is so easy to lose what we have gained. During my 30 years with unions, I have often been one of only two female National Secretaries in NZ. That’s not good enough but will only change if we call it out.

There is so much more to say, after all three decades in just a few hundred words would be impossible. So instead I’ll leave saying thank you – thank you for the trans-Tasman rivalry and friendship; thank you for standing up and for standing with us.

Crucial to surviving three decades of activism – great friends and comrades – and NTEU has certainly been that. ◆ Sharn Riggs, National Secretary of New Zealand Tertiary Education Union/Te HautuKahurangi o Aotearoa, 2010–2020 Image: Sharn Riggs on the way to Parliament to lobby for TEU members.

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

49

◆ MY UNION

Casual/sessional fee increase delayed due to coronavirus On 29 February, NTEU National Executive made the decision to postpone the scheduled biennial increase in casual/sessional membership fees inb order to alleviate financial strain on casual members due to the COVID-19 (coronavirus) outbreak.

The changes, to be implemented later in the year, represent an increase of 4% above the last increase in 2018 – or 2% per year – and is in line with the average wage increase across the sector. These new fees are still significantly less than permanent employees who pay 1% of gross annual salary. A decision on the new date of the increase will be taken in coming months. ◆

Qld Division goes solar & funds APHEDA Last year, the question of utilising the roof space on the Queensland Division office to generate solar energy and offset our consumption was raised. As the building we occupy is wholly owned by the Union, the idea seemed feasible and was investigated further.

A proposal was generated that referred to the 2018/19 NTEU policy on climate change. The solar energy industry is full of a wide range of offers on both quality and price, so after significant research and discussions, a reputable supplier was commissioned to install our 6.4 kilowatt system. Based on our current energy consumption, production and export to the grid, the cost of the system should be recovered within 4–5 years. To date the system has exported (after our consumption) 2410 kilowatts of energy.

As the installation was managed with expertise and great service, we proposed to the supplier that we would advertise their service to our members if the supplier agreed to donate $20 to APHEDA from every solar panel installed on a member’s roof. They embraced the idea, and we have let Queensland members know of the option if they sought a quotation for solar energy. To date, six systems (over 50 panels) have been installed by members, with more to follow.

On typical sweltering and humid Brisbane days our system quietly provides all the power to run our air conditioning, lights, computers, printers etc.

The installers also operate in Victoria and have agreed to extend the offer to donate $20 per panel to APHEDA to any NTEU members in the state. For more information please contact David Szumer, dszumer@nteu.org.au. ◆ David Szumer, Queensland Division

50

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

MY UNION ◆

Upcoming Friday Sessions for members To provide easier access to union education, information and discussion, NTEU is running a program of online video conferencing sessions. These will be held on Friday afternoons, lasting 60 or 90 minutes and cover topics of interest to NTEU members and delegates.

To subscribe to our Friday Sessions email, go to www.nteu.org.au/friday_sessions. Upcoming sessions are: Date

Topic

Presenter

20 Mar

Wage theft campaign at non-higher education providers

Serena O’Meley, Victorian Division Organiser

03 Apr

The NTEU’s role in campus-based organising for climate justice

Kurt Iveson, University of Sydney

17 Apr

Administrative arrangements for NTEU elections

Ken McAlpine, National Industrial Officer (Research & Projects)

15 May

How to shoot a short video on your phone to tell members’ stories

Jake Wishart, Communications Organiser (Digital)

29 May

Becoming active and finding allies in your workplace and beyond Alison Barnes, National President

12 Jun

Understanding the casual/sessional academic rates of pay

Linda Gale, Victorian Division Senior Industrial Officer

26 Jun

Enforcing agreements – an organising plan and case study from Melbourne University Branch

Sarah Roberts, Victorian Division Assistant Secretary

10 Jul

Using campaigns as a recruitment method – a case study of the Sydney University Casuals Enforcement Campaign

Rhianna Keen, University of Sydney

31 Jul

Workplace Health and Safety campaign – addressing psychosocial issues

Gabe Gooding, National Assistant Secretary

SOLIDARITY RAFFLE 2020

For more than 35 years, Union Aid Abroad - APHEDA has worked with unions and social movements abroad to support their efforts to defend their rights. In a globalised world, your contribution gives power to workers everywhere.

$5

APHEDA.ORG.AU/RAFFLE

YOU COULD WIN A SHARE OF MORE THAN

$12,000

WORTH OF PRIZES!

1ST PRIZE

2ND PRIZE

3RD PRIZE

$8,000 TRAVEL VOUCHER!

$1,799 BIKE!

$500 BOOK VOUCHER!

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

BONUS PRIZE

$1,799 BIKE!

51

◆ MY UNION

New NTEU staff Aimee Hulbert

Please welcome new staff in our offices.

Division Organiser, Vic Div

Jake Wishart

Communications Organiser (Digital), National Office Jake is a strategist, organiser and campaigner with experience at four unions.

He’s the President and co-founder of the Young Workers Centre at Victorian Trades Hall.

Before joining the NTEU, he was working with GetUp! and has years of experience working in the climate movement.

Claire McKinnon WA Division Organiser

Aimee Hulbert started with NTEU in November. She previously worked at the Financial Services Union, after being a rank and file member for six years, where she helped win a wage theft dispute against NAB.

Ben Kunkler

Campaigns & Communications Officer, Vic Div As a casual academic at the University of Melbourne, Ben helped organise the casuals wage theft campaign. He is a published academic. His poetry, criticism and non-fiction has been published in TEXT, Rabbit and Overland.

Staff movements

Claire is the new Organiser for Murdoch and Notre Dame universities. Previous roles include Lead Organiser: the Wilderness Society, Community Campaigner: Save Our Marine Life and The Kimberley Like Nowhere Else campaigns, plus various voluntary roles for environmental and social justice causes.

Claire's a terrible gardener but good at spontaneous Dad jokes.

After 7 years as Queensland Division’s Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Organising & Recruitment Officer, we bid a very sad farewell to Phil Mairu. Phil has been an energetic and effervescent presence around the NTEU for a long time, and members and colleagues are going to miss him a great deal. We know that wherever he ends up next will be very lucky to have him. ◆

NATIONAL OFFICE STAFF Director (Industrial & Legal) Wayne Cupido Senior Legal Officer Kelly Thomas National Industrial Officer (Research & Projects)

Ken McAlpine National Industrial Officer Campbell Smith Industrial Support Officer Renee Veal Director (Policy & Research) Policy & Research Officer

Paul Kniest Terri MacDonald

National A&TSI Director National A&TSI Organiser

Adam Frogley Celeste Liddle

National Organiser (Media & Engagement)

Michael Evans National Organiser (Publications) Paul Clifton Communications Organiser (Digital) Jake Wishart Education & Training Officer Helena Spyrou Executive Manager Peter Summers National Membership Officer Melinda Valsorda ICT Network Engineer Tam Vuong Database Programmer/Data Analyst Uffan Saeed Payroll Administrator/HR Assistant Jo Riley Manager, Office of General Secretary & President

Anastasia Kotaidis Executive Officer (Meeting & Events) Tracey Coster Admin Officer (Membership & Campaigns)

Julie Ann Veal Receptionist & Admin Support Leanne Foote Finance Manager Glenn Osmand Senior Finance Officer Gracia Ho Finance Officers Alex Ghvaladze, Lee Powell,

Tamara Labadze, Daphne Zhang

You need to update your NTEU membership details if: OR

Your work address details change.

Office, building, campus etc.

OR

Your Department/ School changes its name or merges.

OR

You move house.

Required if your home is your nominated contact address.

You change your name.

You need to contact the National Office if: Please contact:

OR You move to another institution.

Your employment details change.

Transfer of membership between institutions is not automatic.

Please notify us to ensure you are paying the correct fees.

Your credit card or direct debit account details change.

52

You are leaving university employment.

Deductions will not stop automatically.

Please note that your Member Tools login is different to your Member Benefits login.

For help call 03 9254 1910

Melinda Valsorda, Membership Officer (03) 9254 1910 mvalsorda@nteu.org.au

Please contact: OR

Update online at

nteu.org.au/ members

Tamara Labadze, Finance Officer (03) 9254 1910 tlabadze@nteu.org.au

ADVOCATE VOL. 27 NO. 1 ◆ MARCH 2020

Have your payroll deductions stopped without your authority?

Please urgently contact Your institution’s Payroll Department

Planning a weekend away?

Take advantage of the upcoming public holidays to enjoy travel discounts through your NTEU benefits.

Hire Car Offers Save on your next road trip with offers from popular car brands.

Choose either a discounted price or set rate with reduced excess.

Discounted Hotels Save up to 60% on your next hotel with an exclusive promotion code from Member Advantage. Login to view it now!

Attraction Tickets Wherever you travel in Australia, discover discounted tickets to leisure activities including theme parks, zoos, iconic attractions and more!

nteu.memberadvantage.com.au

Health insurance is our major UniHealth is health insurance for the education community and their families. We get you, your work and your needs. And as a not-for-profit, we’re focused on making sure our members get the best possible value – instead of payouts for shareholders.

Start getting the most out of your health insurance.

Visit unihealthinsurance.com.au or call 1300 367 906 Eligibility criteria and conditions apply. Teachers Federation Health Ltd ABN 86 097 030 414 trading as UniHealth.

UNI-NTEU-02/20