EB Academic Staff Correspondence

Dear Colleagues   The NTEU issued a press release on Monday that included, inter alia, the NTEU executive's view that UNE has the capacity to pay salary increases to the level demanded by the NTEU based on an analysis carried out by Dr Battin and Associate Professor Eddie. For those NTEU members who are interested in rational debate, let me once again refer you to the evidence that has been provided to the NTEU that counters that view. 1. Management's response to Associate Professor Eddie's paper of the 9 May 2000. This response effectively addresses all issues raised by Associate Professor Eddie as well as identifying clearly the major flaw in the analysis of including 'tied funds' i.e. research, scholarship and prizes in those funds that are available for salary increases. The paper can be found at the following website. http://www.une.edu.au/eb99/response_gdennehy.htm 2. Deloitte Touche Tomatsu DETYA commissioned this independent firm in 1998 to provide a report on the financial status of Australian Universities. The report included a financial model to allow Universities to gauge the impact of salary increases. The model shows that if the University was to agree to the salary levels demanded by the NTEU, it would result in an increase in the University's operating deficit and a serious decline in its financial position. 3. Arthur Anderson The University commissioned Arthur Andersen, an independent consulting firm in September 1999 to provide a report to the Finance Committee of Council on the University's Liquidity for the purpose of reducing its external debt earlier than scheduled. The report provided the following conclusion - 'The University has poor liquidity and low strategic reserves. It is faced with an operational deficit and unfunded salary claims. It may be a prudent time to again review ways to increased income and reduce costs so that it is not dependent on using strategic reserves to fund operations'. 4. McKinnon Benchmarking This project was funded by DETYA in 1999 and completed in 2000. The goal of the project was the development of a relevant, well tested benchmarking manual in a common, easy to use format for Australian and other universites. Included in the 67 benchmarks are six that relate to the Universitys' financial position. In summary, the University is below best practice in 4 of the 6 benchmarks. The areas rated at the lowest levels and therefore of greatest concern are Diversity of Revenue and Liquidity. The NTEU EB team has been in possession of all this information since 1 June 2000, and as of today, 10 weeks on, no response from the NTEU has been forthcoming. The weight of this evidence confirming the University's lack of capacity to fund salary increases to the level the NTEU is demanding cannot be ignored. It is time that the NTEU desists from misleading the campus community and works towards achieving an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement that provides opportunities for staff to achieve parity with other institutions without impacting severely on the quality of our offerings and on staff employment and working conditions. Graeme Dennehy gdennehy@metz.une.edu.au

Maintained by Industrial Relations & Workplace Change. © 1999 University of New England, Armidale, NSW 2351. Last revised: 18 Aug 2000 Email:rwood@metz.une.edu.au