The two unions at the University of Guyana (UG) say they have been vindicated by a decision of the UG Council to have an evaluation done of the performance of outgoing Vice-Chancellor, Professor Ivelaw Griffith before any decision is taken on a possible new contract.
The University of Guyana Workers Union (UGWU) and the University of Guyana Senior Staff Association (UGSSA) had been locked in a battle with the UG Council on several issues pertaining to Griffith.
In a statement yesterday, the two unions said they felt vindicated by two Council decisions at a meeting on Thursday.
The first decision directed that the Vice-Chancellor proceed on routine end of contract leave from today. This decision was in keeping with an earlier decision at a properly convened meeting of the Council on Monday 15th April. Controversy arose over this after the Council in a round-robin decision decided to overturn the April 15th decision and pay Griffith in lieu of leave. This move was vehemently protested by the unions which among other things had said if the decision stood it would be used as a precedent in the future.
“We had always noted that the University’s practice is to allow persons to proceed on leave, with exceptions being allowed in certain fairly rare instances. Usually payment in lieu of leave would be done at the University’s request and in keeping with its needs and the availability of funds. The first Council decision of 15th April was therefore entirely proper. The round-robin fiasco represented an attempt to overturn the correct decision. We are therefore grateful that in the end Council recognized the error involved in the directive to allow the Vice-Chancellor to be paid and to remain on the job. We are, of course, deeply disappointed that the round-robin debacle has cost the University even more – we now have to pay the Vice-Chancellor even more than we would have paid if he had proceeded on leave on 13th May. The round robin resulted in the cash- strapped University most likely having to pay over one million dollars to the Vice-Chancellor”, the two unions said.
The second decision, the unions said, concerned the Vice-Chancellor’s request to be considered for a new contract. The statement yesterday said that the Council after prolonged debate decided that an evaluation must be done before any decision is made about either award or non-award of the contract.
“Our principle with regard to the Vice-Chancellor’s contract has been that the award of any new contract should only take place after an evaluation of his performance has been undertaken. We have been advocating for years for the evaluation of the senior members of the administration. To our knowledge, none has ever taken place of the current set of administrators, though we believe new contracts have been awarded to some of them. In the interests of accountability, and so that the University can learn from the tenure of any senior administrator, this practice should become standard. We are pleased that the University Council has also moved to establish that evaluation should become a routine aspect of any Vice-Chancellor’s tenure”, the unions said yesterday.
They added that they are aware that there are members of Council who do not seem to yet grasp these principles, or if they do, did not seem to want them applied in the case of the Vice-Chancellor.
“While this is unfortunate, we shall not cease our relentless advocacy of these principles, and we hope that these members of Council will be able to fully endorse them in the future”, the unions added.
