Ballot of Staff at Dublin City University vote NO confidence in the President of the University.

dublin | rights and freedoms | news report Tuesday December 02, 2008 15:03 by Academic - University College

No Confidence in DCU President

A Motion of Censure and No Confidence in the President of Dublin City University (DCU) was carried with a clear majority on Thurs Nov 20, 2008 following a secret ballot of all staff at the university organised by the representative for all staff, SIPTU.

Four Motions for Ballot were carried with a clear majority in each case on Thurs Nov 20, 2008 following a secret ballot of all staff at the university organised by the representative for all staff, SIPTU.

The Motions carried were:-

Motion 1: SIPTU encourage University Management not to abandon procedures of natural justice by adopting summary dismissals for any staff member with notice but without cause.

Motion 2: SIPTU guarantee that University Management provides for ‘tenure’ of all permanent members of academic staff by explicitly defining tenure in Statute in both a transparent and meaningful manner.

Motion 3: Motion of Censure and NO confidence in the senior management of the University.

Motion 4: SIPTU defend academic freedom, tenure and natural justice by requiring that Statute 3 contain procedures for suspension and dismissal of an employee or academic staff member that are agreed and fully endorsed by all members through a vote.

Motion 3 declaring censure and No Confidence in the outgoing President, Ferdinand Von Prondzynski, and the Secretary of the University, Mr. Martin Conry, culminates from several years of litigation and industrial relations disharmony at the University as a direct result of the attempted introduction of a controversial university statute, penned by Von Prondzynski, an industrial relations academic lawyer, in 2001.

Since 2001, Von Prondzynski has been embroiled in litigation at the University. He attempted to use ‘new powers’ bestowed on him through the Universities Act, 1997 that culminated in the introduction of a university statute, to dismiss tenured members of academic staff for no cause or reason.

The Labour relations commission (LRC), the Rights Commissioner and more recently, the High Court all adjudicated against Von Prondzynski citing his introduction of the controversial statute as an ‘invalid exercise’.

Von Prondzynski is currently appealing a High Court judgement to the Supreme Court in his final attempt to have the power to hire and fire academic staff at the university as he so pleases for no good cause or reason and thereby end 'academic tenure' at the university.