Current Enterprise Agreement (Clauses 2.21.1 and 3.27.1) In his may 25, 2020 e-mail, the Vice-Chancellor proposed an amendment to the University of Melbourne Enterprise Agreement with the proposed amendment published on that date (Original Proposed Variation). On Friday, casual workers at the art faculty, proudly employed by unions, asserted their power to work with a university branch that has for too long treated it as a “soft cost” and excluded it professionally. We therefore rejected the university`s “final” offer of backpay, which would have had only once again short-circuited occasional payments by paying only one third of what was owed for six years of unpaid wages. We wanted pay equity, wages that are no longer stolen. Contrary to the university`s proposal, the termination clauses of the enterprise contract do not apply only to “involuntary” dismissals (see university letter of 27 May 2020). www.abc.net.au/…/university-sector-new-era…/12654828 In his email of 25 May 2020, the Vice-Chancellor stated that the variant proposed by the university offered “as much protection as possible for jobs”. A great job of hundreds of casual members to build solidarity from the basis of a two-year campaign. Countless meetings, rallies, petitions, dean appointments, zoom bombings and finally an appearance in the Vice-Chancellor`s villa, the Cumnock House, provided by the university. We went to ask a question: Is such generosity appropriate when casual staff owe $6 million in wages? The courses, led by casual teachers, are at the heart of the University of Melbourne`s student learning experience. However, as today`s ABC report shows, working conditions and learning conditions for students are not a top priority for the university. Instead, the university systematically wastes money on consulting fees, senior executive bonuses and events like the Melbourne Ceremony. While this may be news to the general public, it`s not for UoM Casuals. In February of this year, at the opening ceremony, we staged an action to let new students know that UoM refuses to pay casual players to participate in lectures; Refuses to pay occasional payments appropriately; and that wage theft is widespread in UoM.
We stressed that employees` working conditions are the learning conditions of students and that this should be the university`s priority, not millions of dollars evenings or a UoM brand fashion line. UoM still refuses to pay casual players to attend conferences or related labelling and uses the pandemic as a pretext to “innovate” other wage thefts of their most precarious employees – casual workers. Among the latest developments, the university published on June 2, 2020 the final version of its proposal (Final Proposed Variation). The originally proposed alternative and the proposed final amendment provide for the same provision with respect to wage taxation. Join the movement for a university sector based on fair jobs: www.nteu.org.au/join NTEU University of Melbourne Acting Branch Secretary, Ruth Jelley, asks what is the real stakes of the university`s proposed job cuts and calls for a return to the fundamentals of public higher education. www.megaphone.org.au/…/university-of-melbourne-… Staf… In an email of May 25, 2020, the Vice-Chancellor pledged to “have no abstinence from our employees.” In addition to the fact that the salary increase granted on May 1, 2020 was granted from May 1, 2020. The proposed initial amendment also proposed that the voluntary separation regime provide for less significant rights than those under the enterprise agreement and that the university acknowledged that it did not “clean up an adequate basis for severance pay” (see university letter of May 27, 2020).