LK: The School of Culture, History and Language review of 2013, was that a big one?
Yes, it was a big explosion.
LK: Were the professional staff involved?
Well, they always said, ‘you are involved’, but they already had their mind made up about how things were going to look, and basically you just have to go along with everything and accept the outcome.
LK: Did the university management say that the restructure was going to affect professional staff as well?
In the early stage of the review in 2013, they said that we would all have to apply for our jobs, but then they didn’t end up doing that. For a long time we had that hanging over our heads as well.
Some jobs, they said would probably go and this is why some people jumped ship. When they did a restructure plan, although you couldn’t see peoples names you could see positions, and they went through a few rounds of this, rejigging it and working out which positions would come under what umbrella. Research Students just didn’t seem to fit anywhere.
LK: So how many people left CHL during the restructure, not by being kicked out, but that they wanted to leave because it was a mess?
We all felt under extreme pressure about retaining our jobs. Certain staff member felt they were going to be targeted, um, definitely three admin staff left out of about 10. They had enough, and didn’t like how things were unfolding, the uncertainty of it all… they felt it was better to jump ship. After that the management didn’t make any more admin staff redundant.
LK: Was it the same with academics?
A lot of academics did the same, they just couldn’t take the stress and uncertainty anymore and jumped ship. I think about six academics left before they formally notified anyone. The academics didn’t know who exactly was going to be targeted. They found out at one on one meetings with the Dean – which I understand wasn’t legal apparently.
Academics should have been able to apply for their jobs. Management should have said: there are five Chinese historian positions and you can all apply for these positions. But what they said is: there are five positions and these five are staying and these two are leaving. We still don’t know why they chose some people and not others.
LK: So, at that time CHL had a large number of HDR students?
We had around 200 at the time.
LK: Can you tell me how did all of this affect the student body from your view?
Other than the uncertainty, there was a lot of talk in the corridors, and a lot of rumours getting around. Some of them weren’t true, but people were just panicking and of course those rumours got to the students.
I’m just glad I wasn’t a student, being an admin staff was stressful enough. Some of the academics just shut off wouldn’t talk to the students and a lot of them put the wind up the students by saying ‘what are you going to do if I’m not here?’. Others that just left and wiped their hands of their students leaving them short of supervisors. No student went through unscathed, because they were affected through their peers if not directly from their panel members.
The management appeared to have given no thought as to how the review would affect students.
LK: How many students lost their main supervisor?
There was quite a few that lost their main supervisor, the loss of 6 active academics who had lots of students caused some ripples. Some students transferred out with their supervisors and others had to be accommodated within CHL.
LK: Can you tell me about the experience of the students who were in the fieldwork and had no idea what was happening?
Shear panic. There was one in particular who arrived in the field in April, she lost her whole panel. We had to try to put together a panel for her while she was still away. This was no easy task. Other students were more fortunate, as their other panel members stepped up.
LK: So this was all work you had to do, on top of your normal work. Tell me more about the extra work you had to do due to the review.
For me, the fallout from the Review created a lot of extra work on top of my normal duties. There were additional meetings to go to, and more crisis management tasks to take care of. Also a few academics had to really step up and do much more than usual, while also being told that they may also lose their job. It felt like everyone was on a roller-coaster. Some students really stepped up and became student reps which was great because other students were floundering and didn’t know where to turn. It brought out a lot of good in people, with many going above and beyond to support their peers.
LK: From your view, having worked in the sector for a long time, what do you think was wrong with the CHL review?
The whole way it was handled… It wasn’t dealt with as the whole of the school, it was broken into academic, student, staff, while all the time it was affecting everyone. There was so much back fighting, because Management turned everyone against each other due to the way they handled things. It was horrible. The emotional strain that I felt was exhausting, I tried to keep on a strong face at work, but I’d get home and I’d be snappy and my partner would say to me ‘what the hell is wrong with you?’ and I’d say ‘another bad day’. It was my release you know, but it affected my home life. I felt I had to be strong and supportive for everyone around me at work. We were like a family, we were there for each other.
There may have been support out there, but I don’t’ think anyone came to me and said ‘are you ok?’ I mean students probably did but no one from the university management. I certainly formed a strong bond between myself and the people I worked with at the time, we were all in the same boat. We felt like the College management created the problem and left everyone underneath it to tread water until a solution was found.
LK: How did you think that CHL review ended? Do you think it ended?
Obviously for some people it hasn’t ended. For me, I was exhausted, both physically and emotionally. It was so draining; some people became great listeners, [who others] gravitated to talk to.
LK: Did they accept new students during the review?
Yes, students applied during the review but didn’t apply to work with longer standing academics, they all applied for younger academics. New student numbers dropped from the usual 30 down to 5 in a couple of years, and all the new ones coming in applied to be supervised by younger academics. So the school felt obliged to take them on.
LK: Do you think the way the review allegedly ended was ok, in your view?
I think they made the best of a bad deal. Admin probably came out the least scathed.
LK: Administrative/professional staff were holding the fort really.
Yes, if admin were dissolved, I would hate to think of where things would have gone, seeing as how things were going on a daily level. The admin team gained strength from each other. We were a great team.
LK: Any other thoughts on the review?
I’m happy to now put this behind me and live another chapter of my life. I was exhausted, and found it very difficult to do my job properly by moving from one thing to another and then in the back of my mind not knowing if I was going to keep my job. The university management were oblivious to all of us and to what we had to go through.
