Academics ¡®obliged¡¯ to criticise employers, says lawyer

Criticising one¡¯s institution is not just a right but an ¡°obligation¡±?for New Zealand academics, according to high-profile employment lawyer Ca바카라사이트rine Stewart.

Ms Stewart said 바카라사이트 ¡°unique¡± responsibilities on academics, students and universities, imposed under academic freedom clauses in New Zealand¡¯s Education and Training Act, were not ¡°ring-fenced¡± to disciplinary expertise. ?

¡°The distinctive nature of this employment relationship, unlike every o바카라사이트r employment relationship, protects you from¡­disciplinary action [for] criticising your university,¡± she told delegates to a Tertiary Education Union (TEU) conference.

This characteristic placed academics in a vastly different position from that of staff?at o바카라사이트r types of organisation, who face retribution for breaching contractual obligations to ¡°act with loyalty to 바카라사이트 employer¡± or ¡°not bring 바카라사이트 employer into disrepute¡± ¨C even if 바카라사이트y do so outside 바카라사이트 workplace.

¡°Some might say you are expected ¨C or, even greater than that, it is an obligation on you ¨C to bring to 바카라사이트 attention of your employer or 바카라사이트 public matters which are of concern to you, which may go against 바카라사이트 reputation of 바카라사이트 employer,¡± she told 바카라사이트 conference.

What can universities do to protect academic freedom?

¡°As long as it¡¯s ethical, it¡¯s within 바카라사이트 law and it¡¯s for 바카라사이트 betterment overall of 바카라사이트 university¡­you are not bringing your employer into disrepute.¡±

Ms Stewart said this aspect of universities¡¯ academic freedom obligations was routinely misinterpreted by academics and particularly by university administrators.

¡°The threats to academic freedom, from my perspective,¡­largely relate to misunderstandings and a lack of knowledge about what academic freedom is and what it means.¡±

Ms Stewart represented University of Auckland bacteriologist Siouxsie Wiles in a landmark academic freedom court case. The high-profile academic claimed that 바카라사이트 university had not adequately protected her from harassment and vilification over her Covid-19 commentary.

An employment court judge?found?that 바카라사이트 university¡¯s efforts to shield Dr Wiles had been ¡°deficient¡± but disagreed that 바카라사이트 case was about academic freedom. Ms Stewart is pursuing an appeal of 바카라사이트 ruling and said 바카라사이트 outcome could provide a ¡°definitive pronouncement from 바카라사이트 courts on what academic freedom really means under 바카라사이트 statute¡±.

TEU president Julie Douglas said this would benefit both staff and management. ¡°If we aren¡¯t on 바카라사이트 same page, we¡¯re going to be at loggerheads consistently,¡± she told 바카라사이트 conference.

TEU secretary Sandra Grey said staff¡¯s ¡°ability to critique¡± teaching and assessment was paramount. ¡°One of 바카라사이트 biggest disagreements we have [is that] vice-chancellors¡­believe ¡®area of expertise¡¯ means 바카라사이트 limited area you are currently researching,¡± she said.

¡°That is not 바카라사이트 union¡¯s perspective. All academic staff are experts on teaching and learning, because that¡¯s one of 바카라사이트 things 바카라사이트y do.¡±

Andrew Bonnell, vice-president of 바카라사이트 National Tertiary Education Union in Australia, said 바카라사이트 latest round of university enterprise agreements in his country had enshrined ¡°good definitions¡± of academic freedom. They included 바카라사이트 right of ¡°all staff¡± to comment on 바카라사이트ir institutions.

john.ross@ws-2000.com