University of Guyana Tain Campus Director Dr Parsram Thakur has accused the university’s deans of “gross hypocrisy”.
In a four-page statement sent to this newspaper on Wednesday from his Tain Campus office, Dr Thakur said he had so far refused to comment publicly on accusations made against him by the deans, which formed the basis of a decision by some 31 Turkeyen commuting lecturers to withdraw their services from the Berbice Campus earlier this month. “My position was that this was an internal matter and should be thus resolved. In spite of this the deans were trying this case in public and not surprisingly in the face of public rebuke.”
According to Thakur, on November 8, he attended a meeting on the invitation of the Vice-Chancellor to “resolve what was perceived as abusive comments by the director”. The meeting, he said, ended with the parties agreeing not to use the media to air their views or to resolve differences but to dialogue with each other.
This understanding was breached when, on November 25, the Stabroek News carried a full-page statement attacking the University Council and the director, he said.
According to Thakur, as director of the Berbice Campus, he is a member of the Academic Board, the Committee of Deans and the University Council. In his statement, he questioned the legitimacy of meetings of the Committee of Deans and the Academic Board.
“For such meetings to be duly constituted, the Registrar must send out timely notices with an agenda and minutes if available. In one communication there was no meeting but a document signed by less than half of the Committee of Deans,” Thakur argued. “The director questions the decision-making process and the results of such cowardly meetings.”
The commuting lecturers withdrew their services at the beginning of the month, accusing the director of using abusive language and making derogatory statements about them. They also raised concerns with the Committee of Deans over the appointment and promotion of a lecturer to the Division of Education at Tain.
Following this, the Academic Board sought a meeting with the full University Council to resolve what it described as “gravely disturbing events”. These included issues raised by the commuting lecturers, the alleged erosion of the authority of the Vice-Chancellor, the removal of the Bursar from the jurisdiction of the Vice-Chancellor and the Search Committee established to name a Vice-Chancellor among other issues.
There was an impasse, which led to the postponement of the Convocation ceremonies at Turkeyen and Tain. The exercise at Tain had been planned for November 24. However, they have since been rescheduled for December 8 and 15 respectively following a decision by the Academic Board to sit as a Board of Examiners. Chairman of the UG Workers Union Frederick Kissoon was quoted on Tuesday as saying the outstanding issues are still to be resolved.
Meanwhile the Ministry of Education has reportedly signalled its intention to attempt to resolve the issues between the Council, the Academic Board, the Committee of Deans, the Academic community and the UG Workers’ Union and is expected to meet with the parties shortly.
Pro-Chancellor of the University Dr Prem Misir had said in a television programme two weeks ago that disciplinary action could be taken against the deans, but that the council will not meet with the deans until after the Convocations.
Thakur said he challenged the Vice-Chancellor in person and the Deans for “a single evidence of abusive language or disparaging remarks but none came. The director stands by his comment that there was monetary incentive in part or whole for some lecturers coming to the Berbice Campus.”
This, he claimed, is confirmed by the lucrative financial contracts beyond what is offered to Berbice-based teachers with equal qualifications teaching similar courses. This, he said, amounts to approximately $19,500 per trip per week of 15 weeks for each commuting lecturer.
According to the director, “since 2000, this has been the third boycott by Turkeyen of the Berbice Campus. ” He related that in 2000, they demanded conditions, boycotted the fledging campus and received what they exacted. The second boycott came three years ago when the University Council made the campus director an appointee of the council, he said. The Vice-Chancellor “was very angry and led the boycott,” he said. “The deans and the senior administration need to examine their own moral degradation when they held the students hostage because they could not responsibly resolve matters with the director or council.”
According to the statement “their [the deans] recent returning to complete profiles and graduation is a last ditch effort to redeem themselves from the public outrage at their behaviour”.
Thakur said he had been reluctant to respond, but had to do so, “since the deans’ comments were a violation of a trust. To remain silent, however, after many attacks may be construed as guilt”.
