I write to you in connection with the industrial action that has been embarked upon by NEHAWU. In advance, I apologise for the rather lengthy communication, but it is necessary to communicate in full the circumstances that have resulted in the industrial action.
It is important that there is clarity on what the central issue is and what is at stake. It is necessary to emphasise that the current NEHAWU industrial action has nothing to do with annual salary negotiations, a process that is yet to begin for the increase in January 2010.
From the outset of my tenure as Vice-Chancellor, I indicated that a key goal would be to strive to ensure that Rhodes University staff were paid at a level that was competitive with other universities.
At the Vice-Chancellor’s Forum on 29 August 2007, a commitment was made to endeavour to move all staff to the 50th percentile. To give effect to this, an Academic Remuneration Reference Group and a Support Staff Reference Group were established. In addition, a Remuneration Task Team was established to formulate a remuneration policy moving forward. The unions representing staff have been members of the reference groups and task team from the outset.
During the 2008 budget process, R7 million was set aside to address academic remuneration. This permitted clustering academic salaries around the 50th percentile.
In anticipation of the results of a comprehensive review of support staff salaries, in the 2009 budget R9 million was allocated to improve the remuneration of support staff through adjustments and R1 million was allocated to finance the shift to a January (presently October) annual increment date for Grades 6 and above. This shift to a January increase date has already taken place for Grades 1 to 5 from January 2008.
Underpinning our approach have been the principles of equity (fair and just treatment), both internally and in relation to the national higher education sector, transparency and institutional sustainability.
The commitment to external equity means seeking to improve the competitiveness of Rhodes’ salaries in comparison with other universities. The review of support staff salaries indicates that support staff at lower grades, such as cleaners and gardening staff (but excluding catering staff), are competitively remunerated. The minimum total remuneration of a Grade 1 staff member, such as a cleaner, at Rhodes is almost R54 000 per annum (not including medical aid, which some staff do have). The majority of Grade 1 staff, who are at the top of the scale, earn R60 417 per annum (excluding medical aid, including medical aid approximately R67 000 per annum). Comparatively, these Grade 1 staff earn a cash salary that is 8% above the average paid for this grade of job in the national higher education sector.
This, however, is not the case with staff at the higher grade levels - that work in areas such as laboratories, administration, IT and finance. A grade 11 staff member, like an IT professional, who is at the top of the Rhodes scale, is earning a cash salary that is 36% less than the average paid for this grade of job in the higher education sector. This makes it difficult to recruit and retain staff at the higher grades, as the differential between Rhodes and other universities is considerable.
From the outset, the goal in the Support Staff Reference Group process was to move support staff towards the 50th percentile. This is the purpose for which the University Council approved R9 million in the 2009 budget.
The review of support staff salaries revealed the extent of the backlog in Rhodes salaries, relative to the 50th percentile, and especially at the higher grades. To cluster all support staff around the 50th percentile immediately would cost over R30 million. The University, regrettably, in this financial period, cannot finance an additional R21 million. It is important to note that this is not a once-off cost, but recurring as it becomes part of the ongoing annual salary cost. The University is simply not able to immediately accommodate such additional expenditure without debilitating the core academic programme and other operations of the University.
In the light of this reality, the University has approached the support staff market adjustment informed by the stated goal of moving support staff towards the 50th percentile, with equity (fair and just treatment), transparency and institutional sustainability as its guiding principles.
Thus, for the 2009 support staff market adjustment, the University Council approved a differentiated approach for moving staff towards the 50th percentile. This means that:
Grades 1 staff are paid at least 92% of the 50th percentile
Grades 2 - 5 staff are paid at least 84% of the 50th percentile
Grades 6 - 8 staff are paid at least 80% of the 50th percentile
Grades 9 - 14 staff are paid at least 72% of the 50th percentile
Grades 15 - 16 staff are paid at least 70% of the 50th percentile
Grade 17 staff are paid at least 62% of the 50th percentile
Grade 18 staff member (Vice-Chancellor) is paid at least 60% of the 50th percentile
It should be clear that this is an immensely equitable approach. It prioritises moving towards the 50th percentile those support staff at lower grades, relative to those at higher grades. It should also be clear that with respect to the goal of the 50th percentile, some grades are a considerable distance from being at or near 100% of the 50th percentile. The Vice-Chancellor is currently at 60% of the 50th percentile and has agreed to remain there and receive no market adjustment. The Deputy Vice-Chancellors, with their agreement, will receive a minor percentage adjustment, while other senior administrators have all voluntarily accepted limited percentage adjustments, despite being at considerable distances from 100% of the 50th percentile.
The University is strongly committed to continue to improve support staff remuneration, and to do so as quickly as finances permit, so that all staff can be clustered around the 50th percentile (or as the Remuneration Policy Task Team may recommend – in general or also specifically with respect to senior administrators at the higher/highest grades).
Beginning later this year, each year’s budget process will give concerted attention to securing funds to effect further market adjustments. It is, unfortunately, not feasible to indicate in advance precisely what sums will annually be set aside for market adjustments. There are simply too many variables – on the income side, the amount of state subsidies, the level of tuition fee increases, the level of residence fee increases; on the expenditure side, annual salary increases, inflation levels, expenditure on new academic infrastructure and so on.
It must be appreciated that the University’s finances are finite and each year’s budget has to be balanced so that we do not live beyond our means. There are numerous needs and priorities (current salaries, salaries for new staff, operational expenses to cover the different areas of the University, new academic infrastructure such as libraries, lecture venues and laboratories, new residences and sporting facilities, financial aid for students, maintenance, and so on). All these have to be addressed and will present dilemmas and difficult choices. There are grave and unpleasant consequences, as other universities have discovered, in having recurrent deficits without a clear answer as to how any deficits will be covered.
The University Council also approved, as part of the 2009 remuneration market adjustment, the following so as to enhance internal equity:
1. Moving all catering staff to the same salary scales as others on similar grades; previously, catering staff were paid lower salaries than other staff on the same grades;
2. 26 days annual leave for all staff; previously grade 1 to 8 staff received less annual leave;
3. Elimination of long-leave for new and transferring support staff; previously grades 6 to 8 received up to 26 days and grades 9 and above, 56 days long leave every five years. Grades 1 to 5 staff did not receive such leave, nor did catering and housekeeping staff at all grades. The University will address the current long-leave as part of future market adjustments;
4. In recognition that grades 1 to 5 staff have previously not enjoyed long-leave, a once-off payment of one cycle of long leave to the value of R3.3 million. Monies will also be set aside to address the catering and housekeeping long-leave situation.
The process leading up to the University Council’s decisions has included presentations to the unions and staff, consultation sessions with the unions, and individual letters to staff indicating the consequences of the proposals. Various avenues were provided for input and feedback on the issues related to the market adjustment.
During this process, NEHAWU staged a demonstration and submitted a memorandum of concerns and demands. A key demand was that 60% of the R10 million allocated by Council (after first providing for catering staff adjustments) should be divided equally to Grade 1 to 8 staff; the other 40% could be divided equally between other support staff.
The NEHAWU memorandum was considered by the Remuneration Committee of Council and thereafter by the University Council on 18 June 2009. Council unanimously rejected the NEHAWU demand on good grounds:
1. The demand was greatly at odds with the goal of moving all support staff towards the 50th percentile – this was the objective of the Support Staff Reference Group that NEHAWU had been part of;
2. The demand was highly inequitable. The NEHAWU constituency and lower grades would benefit greatly, and their salaries would move beyond the 50th percentile. Other grades, however, would remain a considerable distance from the 50th percentile. This would have serious implications for recruitment and retention of staff at especially the middle and higher grades;
3. No clear goals or principles underpinned the NEHAWU demand or its proposed allocation of funds to the different grades;
4. In the light of 3. above, a similar demand could be made in relation to future market adjustments, with grave consequences for moving all staff on an equitable basis towards the 50th percentile and for institutional sustainability;
5. R9 million, not R10 million, was allocated for adjustments;
6. Currently, the salary budget constitutes 68% of the University’s central budget. Any significant further increase will impact on other areas of the University.
The University Council, instead, approved the differentiated market adjustments and internal equity measures that have been noted above.
The Council’s decisions were communicated to the unions, to staff in two VC Forums, and to staff in a newsletter.
In a meeting with the administration in early July 2009, NEHAWU indicated that it would lodge a formal dispute with the CCMA, citing its demand for 60% of R10 million to be distributed to Grades 1 to 8.
The administration and NEHAWU met at a CCMA hearing on 28 July 2009. NEHAWU confirmed that the dispute was not one of rights; that is, that Rhodes had not committed an unfair labour practice or curtailed any rights of staff. Rather this is a dispute over a matter of mutual interest, which requires conciliation. The outcome of the CCMA hearing was to accord NEHAWU the right to take industrial action (go-slows, picketing, striking) and the administration the right to a lock-out. The administration also has other rights in accordance with law.
On Friday, 31 July 2009, NEHAWU indicated its intention to undertake industrial action, though no information has been provided as to the precise form/s of such action. The administration met again with NEHAWU to clarify its position but with no success. As a consequence, the administration has instituted preparations to cope with the industrial action.
It is sincerely regretted that matters have come to this. While we seek healthy relations with NEHAWU it is not possible to simply accommodate every demand, especially when there is an unwillingness to motivate the goals or principles underpinning the demand, and when it has grave implications for the future well-being and sustainability of the University. It has been indicated to NEHAWU that the door will remain open for further discussions.
It is hoped that there will be no major adverse effects on the academic functioning of the University and other core operations. However, the industrial action may disrupt certain operations and staff and students are requested to kindly bear with these and are encouraged to help keep operations going.
Staff and students will continue to be informed of developments as and when the need arises. Should you have any questions related to the NEHAWU industrial action please direct those to Mr Ross Marriner on the following email address: h.averbuch@ru.ac.za.