It is in the nature of industrial disputes for wild claims to be made and those who inhabit the lofty heights of academia are no different from even the most menial workers in sometimes gilding the lily to support their position. What are ordinary Fijians to make of the campaign by the two staff unions at USP to remove the Vice Chancellor, Professor Pal Ahluwalia? Well, for a start, fine-tune your bullshit detectors. Because there’s a great deal of bullshit flying around in the PR campaign to try to dislodge him.
First an outright lie arising out of yesterday’s vote of union members on a motion to remove Professor Ahluwalia from one of the main union figures in this dispute – Rosie Fatiaki of the Association of USP Staff ( AUSPS)
FACT: The true figure – as Grubsheet reported in advance of yesterday’s vote – is 42 per cent, not “approximately 70 per cent”.
As we reported: “Of the 602 academic and professional staff, only 255 are members of the Association of the University of the South Pacific Staff. (42 per cent) And of the 763 administration and support staff, only 316 are members of the Administration and Support Staff Union. (41 per cent) So of the combined total of 1365 USP staff, only 571 are union members”.
Now to the statistics and a crude attempt at spin to portray the union action as an overwhelming vote of no-confidence in Pal Ahluwalia’s leadership.
Yes, but how many members of the two unions actually voted? When you look at what happened at the Laucala campus, the figures tell a very different story.
Of the 255 members of the Association of USP Staff, only 142 turned up to vote yesterday or 55 per cent of the membership. And of the 316 members of the Administration and Support Staff Union, 218 voted at Laucala or 69 per cent of the membership.
But there’s the thing, Fiji. Of the total of 1365 USP staff, just 360 at Laucala supported the motion to remove the Vice Chancellor, only 26 per cent of the entire university staff.
So the “96 per cent” figure being peddled in the public arena to make it appear that this was an overwhelming vote of no-confidence in Professor Ahluwalia is nonsense. It has as much credibility as a 96 per cent vote for Vladimir Putin in a Russian election. ie. None.
It was all going the unions’ way until the USP issued a media release last night setting out a few pertinent facts. (see below). 1/ That this is not the groundswell of opposition that would persuade anyone that the VC should be removed. 2/ And more importantly that he still has the support of the students, who are, of course, USP’s raison d’être but don’t seem to matter to the unions in this dispute or they wouldn’t be threatening to withdraw their services.
As Grubsheet has repeatedly stated, while Professor Ahluwalia has the support of the USP Council, he is entitled to continue to run the university and concentrate on the welfare of the students and the wider community.
Grubsheet is hearing that the unions are running the mother of all campaigns behind the scenes to persuade the Coalition government in Fiji to press for a meeting of the USP Council specifically to discuss Ahluwalia’s position. In its weakened state, who knows what the government will do? But if it is going to act on the wishes of barely one quarter of USP staff, something is terribly wrong.
It was a statement that has already changed the media narrative in this dispute.
From the Fiji Times…
And from CFL-Fiji Village:
It is a veiled attempt by nationalists and racists staff at USP to try to remove the VC and replace him with someone incompetent. This strike is going nowhere.
Grubsheet
Are you able to set up a new Facebook account please, the previous one you departed from is history. We await you on FB
Sorry, it isn’t possible. I have been banned from Facebook for sharing “inappropriate content” – leaked images of Lynda Tabuya from Room 233 – after a complaint from her to its Meta owners. It is permanent. But that’s ok. Everyone knows the story.
Grubsheet is permanently banned not Graham Davis himself
Can you not Start a page under GD?
Unfortunately not. I lost my personal page as well. But that’s OK. Life is too short to be concerned about such things. Those I need to be in touch with me are in touch with me.
To readers, the point to be understood is that 96% of the registered union members voted for removal is a strong statement. That Pal and the Executive Committee of Council recently approved the one off back pay ftom 2019-2023 for ALL staff, not just union members, confirms the understanding by Senior Management that the Unions speak on behalf of ALL staff. Pal must stop the bull by using the Unions for convenience.
The 13:10 vote in Council for contract renewal does not demonstrate confidence. Three of the votes came from Pals two appointees from Senate that was a manipulated process and one from the co-opted. The bulk of regional countries did not vote for his renewal. Did Pal share this with you?- not likely! Ask Pal to ‘leak’ his performance review to you for sharing on this site and give your readers the opportunity to decide for themselves on Pals suitability for the job based on his performance and not his ‘smart talk’ only or GS one sided and biased interpretation. To ‘seek improvement’ in core KPIs for a person on 600k indicates many things are not right. The Unions stand to correct this and their presence at voting cannot be ignored. Of note is that consultants who Pal is appointing to replace full-time academics are not permitted to join the Union – more evidence of Pals manipulation of the University system for his own financial benefit to complete things happening in Adelaide!
Crikey, Libby, you really think the rest of us are stupid to try to advance the 96 per cent vote of union members as representing the views of all staff. They do not.
The unions do NOT speak for all USP staff otherwise the majority of staff who aren’t union members would join you and they haven’t
Thank you confirming my main point that Pal Ahluwalia continues to have the confidence of the USP Council. The internal machinations don’t matter.
Since when should anyone who still has majority support be obliged to step aside because a minority of staff members don’t like him? You don’t run the University. The Council does.
As I have said before, when the majority of the Council no longer has confidence in the VC, come back to me.
All this personalisation of the issues does your argument no good at all, including your attack on me. You’re meant to be retired. Rest up and at least try to maintain some degree of perspective.
And not a single mention of the students in your whole comment. Pretty much says it all.
Fijians busy on TikTok whole day. Maths is beyond the dancing artists. And in this case the most educated at USP too.
There you have it Pacific.
Go and get educated at FNU.
USP maths / quantitative statistics:
So applying Fongs logic if 96 percent of Kadavu Islanders voted that Fiji should become part of China, this is a ” Strong Statement ” from Fiji on its desires to be ceded to China. Similarly if all the Simpsons in Savusavu / Taveuni ( Bart and Ian included ) voted that Fiji align itself with Putin’s Russia would that be considered a strong representation of all of Fiji. Tail wagging the dog.
Elizabeth Fong:
You must tell the public that you have gone against Pal because you had asked for an extension of your contract but were denied. You had already got one extension beyond the retirement age and you wanted more. So your battle to remove VC Pal has nothing to do with the USP of VC’s performance. But rather, it’s personal. You want to your job ….the $$$. If your contract were extended, then VC Pal would have been a great VC, the best VC USP ever had.
In your personal battle, you are undermining a regional institution, bringing it into disrepute, and weakening the very institution that has fed you for so long. You are also destroying the career of the USP staff.
Grubsheet has shared the data, <50 of staff are union members therefore the ballot outome is non representative. There must be clarity here that the personalized agenda is from Union leaders, some of whom benefitted from their initial lording of the VC.
The ballot outcome not only lacks representativeness, but it also raises significant concerns about the integrity of the election itself, given the fact that anyone who turned up to vote was provided with lunch vouchers. Providing meal vouchers to voters can be construed as a form of vote-buying, which undermines the principle of free and fair elections. Such practices compromise the legitimacy of the electoral process, as they may influence voters’ decisions inappropriately and diminish the trust in the system. When the fundamental principles of democracy are compromised, the validity of the election results comes into serious question, making it essential to address these issues to uphold the legitimacy of the electoral outcome.