The FUTA strike: How rational is it?
September 11, 2012, 7:41 pm , The Island
Professor Rohan Rajapakse
Senior Professor, University of Ruhuna and Consultant, Ministry of Higher Education
The strike action by the FUTA members from July 4th has paralysed some universities except the medical faculties for the last two months. However, as a person directly involved with FUTA discussions with the Secretary, Ministry of Higher Education I thought it is my duty to tell the people of Sri Lanka the background and the basis of the FUTA demands for the last two years. The FUTA initiated discussions with the Secretary /MOHE almost one and a half years ago and six main demands were made to the Ministry. Let us examine their demands and the solutions offered in detail.
1. Salary Issue
The salary hike that FUTA made in 2011 was based on the Jiffry-Malik Commitee which recommended the substantial salary increase to academics. The Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE) along with the UGC made unprecedented salary hike for academics from mid 2011 culminated in issuing the UGC circular no 985 where a Senior Professor was entitled to total monthly salary of Rs. 140,721 and a Probationary Lecturer was given Rs. 55,750 effective from October 2012. This includes the increase of the basic salary of Senior Professor (16.18%) to Probationary Lecturer (3.25%). However FUTA was not satisfied about this massive salary increase and wanted a 20% basic salary increase to all academic grades from 2012 and further increase of basic salary of 16.7% from the budget of 2013. This was not acceptable to the Ministry of Finance as it will upset the present salary structure of the Government Sector. However, at the time this will get into press I understand that FUTA and the Ministry of Finance have agreed on mid and long term solutions to solve this protracted issue.
2. Attraction and retention of young
academics in the university service
The FUTA wanted the Universities to pay a salary to attract and retain the best talented graduates in the university system. Mindful of this demand, the MOHE/UGC fixed the initial total salary of a Probationary Lecturer at Rs, 55,775, a month through the circular No. 985. When you compared this with salary scales of the government sector, naturally you find it is an attractive scale second only to the scale given to the Management Trainees at the Central Bank (Rs 60000/ month). A newly recruited graduate at the Sri Lanka Administrative and comparable services are given a total salary of Rs 29,988. A Research Assistant/Officer in Research Institutes Rs 24,725, Development Assistants/Monitoring Officers at Rs 16535, and recently graduates were employed in a scheme at Rs. 10,000 a month. The FUTA through its demand wanted the MOHE/UGC to pay this category Rs. 55,000 in their preliminary proposal and in fact the MOHE has given much more than the FUTA demand.
3. Six percent of GDP for education
The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the total market value of all the products and services produced in the country within a year. The 2011 Central Bank reports that the Government income as a % of GDP is 14.3% and the total expenditure and net landing is 22.9% of GDP. Therefore a 6% GDP is around 41.95 % of the government income and about 26.4 % of the Government expenditure. This has resulted where the government has to spend one fourth of its expenditure on education leaving three fourth for all other essential mandatory services of the government. A sensible government cannot allocate such an amount for education leaving the rest to health, salaries, pensions, subsidies (fertilizer) etc. Also allocation of GDP to the sectors is a legislative duty of the Parliament and a trade union cannot make such a demand nor can a single Ministry make such a decision. However, the MOHE has progressively given increased amount to Higher Education from 2000 Rs. 5,000 million to Rs. 21,410 million in 2011. It is noted that the amount of funds returned by the Universities to the Treasury during the same period is Rs. 11,157 million from 2008-2011 a hefty amount. The cabinet last week has approved an increased percentage for education on a matter of principle and I am sure all those who are concerned would be happy of this decision by the Cabinet. The FUTA has mentioned an array of number of countries which are making around 6% GDP on education but an analysis of those countries reveals that either they are fee levying countries for education (no free education) or ultra poor countries who has allocated increased % to education to avert poverty.
4. Political interference in university affairs
It is the academics or teachers who run the affairs of a university. The Senate, Faculty Boards, numerous committees (Curriculum,Finance etc) are composed of teachers who are responsible for decisions. The Vice Chancellor, Deans, Head of Departments are all academics and even the University Grants Commission the Chairman and the Vice Chairman are Senior Professors which includes the Commission members of whom majority are academics. It is the Council chaired by the VC that nominates 3 names for the post of Vice Chancellor on guidelines given in the circular issued by the UGC, culminating with the appointment by the President from among the three names suggested by the Council. The Procedure of appointing the Council members other than the academics are mentioned in the University Act of 1978 and very often it is the Vice Chancellors who recommend names for appointments as council members to the UGC. According to the University Act of 1978 the Minister in charge of Higher Education has the responsibility for the general direction of the university education and administration of the Act. This means the Minister and the Ministry have the obligation with accountability to carry out actions for the benefit of higher education. The Minister is vested with authority and independent capacity to act in this domain and this could not be contrived as political interference as alleged by the FUTA. It is also worth mentioning that the authority of the subject Minister runs for several pages in the ACT, but there is no mention of FUTA anywhere in the act although the power and authority of Student unions are listed.
5. Sri Lanka University Academic Service (SLUAS)
The FUTA proposed to have SLUAS to have academics as a separate service in the university system. The MOHE was willing to consider this provided that as in other services in the country like SLAS, SLPS. SLAGS there will be central recruitment of academics by the UGC and a teacher transferable service within the university system. However the FUTA was against these two suggestions by the MOHE but the Cabinet at its weekly meeting has accepted this proposal. Hence I hope that steps will be taken to establish the SLUAS very shortly and as it is a separate service the MOHE will in future could discuss the interim salary demands of the FUTA.
6 Rate of payments at university exams
In Sri Lanka unlike in the USA or in the western countries the academics are paid for the services rendered by them in examinations in the capacity of Supervisor, Invigilator, Marking Examiner ( Internal and External) etc. The rates of payments for these examinations have been increased upto 500% by the UGC (Circular No 981) with concurrence of the Ministry of Finance. In addition the fee for visiting lecturers has been increased to Rs 1500 per hour. The teachers are entitled to earn enhanced amount through their teaching for Post Graduate Degrees, External Degree Programmes, Diploma and Certificate Programmes, and also through Consultancies given to the Private or NGO Sector. This is one of the main demands of the FUTA in 2011 and the MOHE/UGC has fulfilled this long term demand of FUTA.
These were the main six demands of the FUTA and besides there were other suggestions. The FUTA wanted the academics to obtain housing loans from state banks for which MOHE has discussed with the State Banks and agreed upon granting the academics Rs. 1 million at 7% interest and Rs. 2 million at ( 9%) interest. The Government will bear part of the interest up to maximum of 5.5% for Rs. 1 million and 5% for Rs. 2 million respectively. Besides the FUTA wants to cancel the leadership programme commenced last year and the 100 foreign scholarship schemes given for foreign students to enrol in Sri Lanka Universities. The MOHE requested FUTA for alternate programme for leadership programme if they are against but so far there is no response. The MOHE believes by giving scholarships to foreign students it will enhance the rating of Sri Lankan universities in the World Class Universities map.
Finally we should discuss the repercussions of this two month long strike action by FUTA.
1. There is no one in the final year students that are able to graduate. We are all aware that even a one month delay in graduation will be enough to delay the progress of their lives by years.
2. The academics are without pay for the last two months as the UGC has issued a circular in 2006 informing all that it will accept the basic right of workers to strike but there is no pay for no work which is endorsed by the Labour Department.
3. The Government wants Sri Lanka to be a Knowledge Hub in next few years and it may not be possible to achieve the targets if this strike gets dragged on.
4. The academics themselves are not able to present their findings in foreign forums/workshops as they have to certify that they are not on strike to get clearance from the MOHE.
