Griffith Uni Staff Furious Over Restructure that “Only” Foreshadows 300 Job Losses While Management Keeps Cash

The Griffith Vice -Chancellor, Professor Carolyn Evans, today released the details of the University-wide restructure which flags the loss of 300 Jobs. There will be more positions going than that as there are also voluntary retirements that sit outside the restructuring process.

NTEU Griffith Branch President Garry McSweeney called for members to engage with the consultation process, but condemned the job cuts. “These cuts are arbitrary and unnecessary. Griffith management seem to be able to find $280 million for a new CBD campus, but they can’t find the money to retain the staff that do the work. They are also holding onto their $200+ million investment fund. Their priorities are evident.”

“It’s particularly galling that the VC wouldn’t allow any questions at today’s Town Hall with staff,” McSweeney said. “I couldn’t believe my ears when I heard the VC say that there were ‘only’ 188 redundancies on top of the 111 voluntary retirements that are involved. It doesn’t feel like a small number to the staff facing the loss of their livelihoods,” he added.

NTEU Queensland Secretary, Michael McNally, condemned the timing and the nature of the cuts, particularly given strong enrollment figures for 2021.

“The majority of the cuts target the professional staff that make the university work. Student support staff, IT, integrated learning and many other critical areas are affected. This will have a significant negative impact on the student experience,” McNally added. “And when are these staff going to find out if they are made redundant? 9 December. Merry Christmas!”

“Griffith management is also clearly using the pandemic as an excuse to ‘re-profile’ their teaching staff from academics that have a balance between teaching and research to teaching intensive academics,” McNally said. “This will affect the quality of teaching and research as well as the quality of jobs at Griffith, and the VC confirmed in the Town Hall that this was a ‘cost-saving’ measure.”

/Public Release. This material comes from the originating organization and may be of a point-in-time nature, edited for clarity, style and length. View in full here.