The annual ceremony to recognise professional staff who have achieved 25 years service with UQ was held immediately prior to Senate. I have enjoyed attending these ceremonies for the 12 years I've been on Senate (including my own in my first year on Senate in 2006). It is a nice gesture. Although to include academic staff would blow out the size of the ceremony, I feel long-serving academic staff should be recognised as well - perhaps at the 30 year mark? It was lovely to see my first supervisor at UQ, Marjike Triebels (now Schmidt), receive her award (obviously she has had breaks in service since 1981).
Fossil-free UQ staged a picket of Senate and I was pleased to stop and talk to the protestors who continue their campaign to get the University to divest from fossil fuel investments.
Reports from the Vice-Chancellor, President of the Academic Board and key Senate Committees on happenings since the last Senate meeting. Approval of a new Sexual Misconduct Policy and Procedures. DVC(EE) Iain Watson gave a succinct presentation on industry partnerhips. Of interest is that three of the top 15 partners we have are involved in fossil fuel extraction, but the contributions of the top three partners (Qld Govt, Aust Govt excluding ARC and NHMRC, and Australian Foundations) vastly overshadow the research funding of each of the other 12.
The Vice-Chancellor's report included a progress report on the Finance and HR transition. It showed that 50 FTE fewer staff will be in the finance function by the end of 2017 (compared to before ESS). The figure for HR was not stated but I know it to be around 20 at the most. Some jobs have been lost from the ITS restructure implemented earlier this year and a handful from Legal Services. Another few dozen could go in the P&F Asset Services and HDR Administration restructures currently under consideration. For all the attention on ESS, the elephant in the room is Execption-Based Recruitment, introduced in September 2016 - 160 FTE jobs gone by May 2017 - an updated figure will be sought by the unions via the Professional Staff Consultative Committee. Let's hope some of the lessons learnt from the hasty approach taken with Finance & HR are implemented for similar scale transformations to come.
A robust discussion was had against a well-researched discussion paper on whether members of Senate should be remunerated, and if so by how much. Remuneration of university senate/council members is not a new idea and with certain caveats, I think the advantages outweigh any disadvantages (and I am not conflicted because if it were to come in, I won't be on the Senate, this being my final year). The approach of members to the issue was a moderate one. Agreement in-principle was reached on how to approach the issue and further consideration will be given at the December meeting.
A request from the interest group was tabled for discussion. Two issues were discussed:
1. Should Senate revisit the majority decision it took earlier in the year to not divest from its relatively small and indirect holdings in fossil-based investments?
2. Are any Senators conflicted and, if so, should they have absented themselves for the item in the first place.
The feeling of the majority of members was that no significant development had occurred recently that would warrant revisiting the decision.
Six Senators identified by FFUQ as potentially conflicted due their memberships of other boards, etc, spoke about why they were in fact not conflicted and so why it had not occurred to them that they should declare a conflict when the matter had come up for discussion. I and others in the room felt that the Senators concerned accounted for themselves well. None was going to achieve a material benefit from the UQ decision on the matter. Senate was satisfied that members had acted appropriately.
I pointed out that the perception of a conflict of interest is a good enough reason to make an up-front declaration, and that this was the learning that Senators might take away in a situation of a contentious and emotional issue in the future.
