Dear Editor
The University of Guyana Unions, the UGSSA and the UGWU, reject as inadequate, incomplete, restrictive and wholly unsatisfactory the evaluation process currently being implemented by the council to assess the performance of the Vice-Chancellor Professor Ivelaw Griffith. The UG Council has failed to engage in annual evaluations of the Vice-Chancellor and his senior administrative team, notwithstanding repeated requests from the unions to do so.

This current evaluation design fails the best practice and institutional example test as it neglects to do the following:

1. Involve the university’s most critical stakeholders – students and staff – as part of the evaluation exercise of the Vice-Chancellor.
2. Involve qualified external reviewers.
3. Conduct a site (physical plant) evaluation. Instead the evaluation process currently being implemented simply involves: 1. A self-evaluation by the Vice-Chancellor; 2. individual assessment by members of Council of the Vice-Chancellor. Two comments are instructive on the latter item. First, several members of the council had indicated that they were not aware of what was going on in the university.

Their lack of awareness is unsurprising since the council has not been furnished with all the information requested, particularly with regard to the university’s finances. Incredibly these well-meaning members are expected to evaluate the vice-chancellor, and their views will be the determining factor in the process. Second, some other members of council have indicated that even in the absence of an evaluation, the vice-chancellor has their unwavering support. This is an extremely problematic stance, given council’s responsibilities to the institution.

The concerns of the institution should be placed first, and loyalty to an individual should not feature in decision-making. Additionally, the unions have reason to believe that the views expressed by certain representatives/nominees on council do not align with those of the groups/bodies they purport to represent.
These council members will also have their views count ahead of the views of members of staff, who must live every day with the consequences of their decisions. It is important to note that the UG Unions have made repeated attempts to have staff members’ concerns be taken seriously by the council. These include: ? The unions’ nominee to council made four separate documented attempts to have council set up a mechanism to look into serious internal complaints. ? The unions requested that council meet with staff. Out of this request four Listening Sessions were held – three sessions at Turkeyen and one at the Berbice campus. To date, council has not discussed these sessions.

The UG Unions at the urgings of staff also wrote the President twice. Our second letter to him was copied to the Minister of Education and the Minister of Finance. We are dissatisfied with the stance adopted by the Government of Guyana on the UG crisis. The Minister of Education invited the unions to a meeting in January 2019. While the minister was not present at said meeting, the unions ventilated our concerns in full with her representative.

No correspondence came from the minister as a result of this meeting. The unions’ heads were again invited to meet with the Minister of Education on Friday May 24, but again the minister was not present. Her representatives were advised that based on the lack of action when we met with the last representative of the minister, the unions would leave and return when the minister was available. Incredibly, even after all the concerns about the process and about the financial position of the university were outlined, the Ministry of Education’s representative on the UG Council had written in May 2019 to support the payment of the vice-chancellor in lieu of leave.

Additionally, the Ministry of Education representative at the council meeting of May 23, had indicated that the ministry was in favour of the vice-chancellor being given another contract even without an evaluation. We find it difficult to understand the positions adopted of the ministry, given that they are very aware of all the problems within the university. We would like to ask why this stance has been adopted, given that the university is a public one, and the tax-payers of Guyana are the ones who deserve to know how their money is being spent, and to feel confident that it is being spent wisely. We are preparing a dossier of all the concerns that we have tried to raise privately with the council. This dossier will be shared publicly, so the Guyanese public can see the concerns the council and the Minister of Education apparently refuse to take seriously.

The unions meanwhile continue to insist that a proper evaluation of the vice-chancellor is required. We continue to insist on a management audit as well as a financial audit of the period June 2016 to June 2019. The unions continue to insist that the vice-chancellor’s contract must not be renewed or extended unless a proper evaluation, a management audit and a financial audit are completed. If the vice-chancellor were confident about his achievements, he would welcome a performance review that conforms to best practice and not one that is deficient and fails to inspire confidence. 3/3 The unions will be staging a peaceful protest on Friday June 9, 2019 between 12:30hrs and 13:00hrs to signal to the University’s Council that it needs to exercise effective and prudent leadership of this our sole national university.
Regards
UGWU and UGSSA