A two-day West Papua Solidarity Forum and mini film festival is being held in Auckland Tāmaki Makaurau next month featuring West Papuan and local academics, advocates and journalists.

Hosted by West Papua Action Tamaki and West Papua Action Aotearoa, keynote speeches, panels and discussion on the opening day, March 7, will focus on updates from West Papuan speakers from the frontlines and activist/academic contexts with responses and regional perspectives from solidarity groups.

Themes will include military occupation updates, colonial expansion, environmental issues, community organising and human rights abuses, said a statement from the organisers.

Speakers include: Viktor Yeimo (online from West Papua), Dorthea Wabiser, Victor Mambor, Ronny Kareni, Kerry Tabuni, Hilda Halkyard Harawira, Emalani Case, Nathan Rew, Arama Rata, Dr David Robie, Maire Leadbetter, Teanau Tuiono, Te Aniwaniwa Paterson.

The evening event is a public mini festival of Papuan films introduced by journalist and editor Victor Mambor from Jubi Media in Jayapura.

The second day, March 8, is dedicated to solidarity development and relationship building across the region and opportunities to support West Papua in Aotearoa, with cultural and political kōrero and talanoa.

This event is an opportunity for students, community groups, media, unions, academics and activists to learn more about West Papua and the current regional and political context.

A media seminar featuring Victor Mambor and organised by the Asia Pacific Media Network (APMN) will also be held at the Whānau Community Centre and Hub on Monday, March 9.

• Note: The Forum event is being held at two venues — the Auckland University Old Choral Hall, 7 Symonds Street, on Saturday, March 7 (9.00am-4.30pm), and at “The Taro Patch”, 9 Dunnotar Road, Papatoetoe, Auckland (close to train station) on Sunday, March 8  2026(9.00am-4.00pm).
• More details, koha and registration at Humanitix by February 20 2026

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The University of the South Pacific staff associations are up in arms about the sacking of a union leader and academic by the university’s chief executive.

In a joint press release, the Association of the University of the South Pacific (AUSPS) and the USP Staff Union (USPSU), this week claimed that USP vice-chancellor and president Pal Ahluwalia had “launched a vicious attack on the staff unions and freedom of speech” after he terminated the employment contract AUSPS president Dr Tamara Osborne-Naikatini on July 9.

They said Ahluwalia sacked Dr Osborne-Naikatini because she spoke to the media about the “flawed process” through which he was offered a renewal to his contract to lead the institution.

“The university’s claim of ‘gross misconduct’ stems from information Dr Osborne-Naikatini allegedly shared, as AUSP President, in an Islands Business interview reported in the March 2024 edition that revealed a flawed process in the review of the performance of Ahluwalia that subsequently led to a two-year renewal of contract,” they said in the release.

Dr Osborne-Naikatini was the staff representative on the the chief academic authority — the USP Senate — to the review committee, they added.

“Dr Osborne-Naikatini stood for the staff of USP and fought for good governance which ultimately led to her termination,” they said.

The staff unions say that by sacking the biology lecturer, Ahluwalia has “launched a vicious attack on the staff unions and freedom of speech” and are demanding her reinstatement.

RNZ Pacific had put these claims to the university.

Staff contracts ‘confidential’
“Please note that all staff contracts, including terminations, are confidential. The university is not at liberty to discuss staff information with third parties,” the USP said in an email statement.

The USP, the premier institution of higher learning for the region, has had to deal with a series of crisis in relation to the good governance practices and staff-management issues since the vice-chancellor first took the job in 2018.

In 2019, Ahluwalia was deported from Fiji in a midnight raid carried out Fijian police and immigration officials, after he fell out of favour with the previous Bainimarama administration, for exposing allegations of corruption and financial mismanagement at the university under the leadership of his predecessor.

He led USP from exile, for some time from Nauru, before relocating to Samoa in 2021. In May this year, the USP Council voted for him to relocate back to Suva.

The staff unions reminded Ahluwalia of the 2019 saga in their joint statement, saying they “stood steadfast with him when he was victimised as the whistleblower. He seemed to have a short-lived memory”.

Earlier this year, the unions were at loggerheads with the management over salary disputes.

They had threatened to take strike action if the executive team failed to meet their demands, which they claimed has been neglected by Ahluwalia.

However, both sides reached an agreement last month, and the unions withdrew their strike action.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A secret ballot by members of the Association of University of the South Pacific Staff (AUSPS) and USP Staff Union have voted in favour of strike action at the institution.

Unofficial results in the poll last Wednesday showed 63 percent in favour, above the needed majority threshold.

AUSPS general secretary Rosalia Fatiaki said staff missed out on salary adjustments in 2019 and 2022.

Fatiaki said the union had not pushed USP at the time to adjust the salaries because they were told the university was in a financial crisis.

The regional university gave staff a two percent pay rise in October 2022, January 2023, and January this year.

However, Fatiaki said it was “way below” the increase needed to match the cost of living in Fiji and unions had not been consulted.

“The management has refused to negotiate salary adjustment and that is what the secret ballot was for,” she said.

USP not engaged
“We now demand that the university be just and fair to staff by looking and negotiating salary adjustments with the union.”

Fatiaki said USP used to contribute an additional two percent above the national minimum for its superannuation contribution to senior staff but this was reduced to the minimum during the covid-19 pandemic and had not returned which the union was demanding.

She said USP had not engaged with the union but had cited financial reasons for withholding pay.

Fatiaki said this was despite more students being on the USP roll.

She said the union was now waiting on Fiji’s Labour Ministry to advise the on next course of action.

“We have not received a confirmation from [the ministry], they have acknowledged the receipt of the secret ballot results and they are yet to formally provide us that confirmation. So we are awaiting for that and we are expecting that to come through today (Friday).”

Fatiaki said she hoped vice-chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia would “come to the table” and take staff grievances seriously.

‘Going round and round’
“We are going round and round and round,” she said.

“Rather than [Professor Ahluwalia] coming to tell us ‘no we can’t, we will not [meet the unions demands]’, he’s sending the representatives to come and talk to us and then they go [and] back to him.

“Now it’s time for him to come to the table and deal with the issues.”

She said staff dissatisfaction with Professor Ahluwalia was not a reason for the strike.

However, she said union members had expressed concerns about the vice-chancellor’s leadership because of “numerous unresolved issues”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

University of the South Pacific staff who once stood by vice-chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia are now up in arms about his role in a decision by pro-chancellor Dr Hilda Heine to disallow a staff paper to be placed on the agenda of the 96th USP Council meeting being held today.

A joint press statement by the Association of the University of the South Pacific Staff (AUSPS) and the University of the South Pacific Staff Union (USPSU) said the blocked paper was in relation to “many unresolved issues faced by the staff over the period 2021 to May 2023”, which included pay and other matters.

The unions said staff from across the region met on November 22 and “are aggrieved and angry at the refusal of the PC (pro-chancellor) and VCP to allow their voice to be heard at council”.

“This is the same VCP that  the staff stood for in his hour of greatest need,” the unions said.

“The same staff who took risks to ensure that he was given worker justice and the opportunity to prove his worthiness of the VCP position.

“That he was a likely party to a decision to disallow the Staff paper is indicative of VCP’s leadership style which has become very clear to staff.”

The unions said USP management refuse to discuss or negotiate a salary adjustment for 2019-2023 and the final course of action was to bring the matter to the council for resolution in preference to industrial action.

What the VC had to say
In response to queries from The Fiji Times, Professor Ahluwalia sent a message he had issued to USP staff.

In it, he thanked them for joining him in a staff discussion which had a “record number of staff who attended with a high level of engagement.

“Whilst we have made considerable progresses, some issues remain outstanding,” the VC said.

He said USP now had a budget that would be presented to the council for approval today.

“Despite the alarming situation concerning declining student numbers, we have managed to ensure no redundancies, albeit, we will only be able to fill 30 per cent of our vacancies next year.”

Professor Ahluwalia said in terms of salary adjustments, the university had “made a great deal of progress, with two salary increases in October 2022 and January 2023 and an increment/bonus for all staff in the middle of the year (2023), and provisions have been made for another salary increase next year subject to council approving our 2024 budget.”

Questions sent to pro-vice chancellor Dr Hilda Heine yesterday remained unanswered.

Felix Chaudhary is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Late last year, the Auckland University of Technology (AUT) initiated a process to eliminate 170 academic jobs to cut costs. The Employment Relations Authority (ERA) found AUT’s approach breached its collective employment agreement with staff and their union and ordered it to withdraw the termination notices.

Tertiary education runs on an insecure labour force in New Zealand and elsewhere. The AUT decision illustrates that even traditionally secure positions are becoming less so.

Tenure is the traditional protection for academics in the tertiary sector, but New Zealand does not have tenure at its universities.

Tenure is more than a perk

A common argument against tenure is that it leads to a complacent, under-motivated university professor. These concerns are hypothetical — evidence that tenure causes productivity differences is lacking.

In fact, one of few large studies on the subject found the opposite. Good administrators should be able to manage any actual productivity issues as they do in all other workplaces.

On the other hand, lack of tenure creates risks for free societies. Tenure is common practice in other liberal democracies. UNESCO says:

Security of employment in the profession, including tenure […] should be safeguarded as it is essential to the interests of higher education.

Tenure is important, if not indispensable, for academic freedom. Academic freedom is essential to a university’s mission, and this mission is a characteristic of a democracy. As University of Regina professor Marc Spooner put it:

A country’s institutional commitment to academic freedom is a key indicator of whether its democracy is in good health.

The Employment Relations Authority has issued a compliance order to the university, requiring it to withdraw its notices of termination. https://t.co/NUvBfqS6ad

— Stuff (@NZStuff) January 5, 2023

Scholarship is not piecework
The ERA said AUT misunderstood terminology in the collective employment agreement.
The clash term was “specific position”. AUT’s position was that specific positions are identified by professional ranks (from lecturer to professor) and the numbers of each role across four particular faculties.

The ERA did not agree and concluded an essential component for identifying specific positions is the employee, being the person who is the current position holder or appointee to a position.

AUT’s assertion would be like the air force using the rank of “captain” to adjust its number of pilots. The number of captains does not tell you what each captain does, be it to fly planes or fix them.

Without tenure, a standard less than this minimum established by the ERA can be used to eliminate academics who have legitimate priorities that do not align with the administrative staff of the day, or are the victims of any other concealed discrimination. The ERA clarification makes it more difficult to inhibit intramural criticism, the right to criticise the actions taken by managers and leaders of the university.

The authoritative review of freedom of speech and academic freedom in Australian universities singles out the importance of academic freedom for this purpose, saying:

It […] reflects the distinctive relationship of academic staff and universities, a relationship not able to be defined by reference to the ordinary law of employer and employee relationships.

The ERA clarification helps to prevent the firing of academics who are teaching, researching or questioning things administrators, funders or governments don’t want them to. But it is a finger in a leaking dyke. Tenure is a tried and tested general solution.

Health of the democracy
We only need to observe the events in the United States to recognise the importance of tenure. This benchmark country has a proud tradition of tenure. Nevertheless state governments are dismantling tenure to impose political control on curriculums. Our liberal democracy is not immune to this.

We need more than tenure-secured academic freedom to enable universities to do the sometimes dreary and at other times risky work of providing societies alternatives to populist, nationalist or autocratic movements. But as the Douglas Dillon chair in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, Darrell M. West, wrote, academic freedom is a problem for these movements.

Recognizing the moral authority of independent experts, when despots come to power, one of the first things they do is discredit authoritative institutions who hold leaders accountable and encourage an informed citizenry.

In a system with tenure, a university would have a defined stand-down period preventing reappointment to vacated positions. For example, if an academic program and associated tenured staff that teach it were eliminated at the University of Arkansas for financial reasons, the program could not be reactivated for at least five years. The stand-down inhibits whimsical or agenda-fuelled restructuring as a lazy option to manage staff.

If a similar trade-off were to be applied to how AUT defined specific positions, then no academics could be hired there for five years. It is very different to be prevented from hiring academics than it is to, say, not re-establishing a financially struggling department or program.

Herein lies the true value of tenure. It is greater than a protection of the individual. It protects society from wasteful or ideologically motivated restructuring as an alternative to poor management. Tenure is security of the public trust in our universities.

Dr Jack Heinemann is professor of molecular biology and genetics, University of Canterbury. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

It’s time for progressive activists to step up. The working class needs you.

On May Day – International Workers Day – we have launched a new union: UTU for Workers Union. Our mission is to build a working class, grassroots, campaigning movement to stop exploitation and end workplace abuse in Aotearoa-New Zealand.

The international trade union movement is in a fight for relevancy to the majority of the working class. Decades of relentless attacks on the workers’ movement have been devastating.

In New Zealand, out of more than 1.5 million private sector workers, less than one in fourteen (7 pecent) are members of a union. If we exclude the large private companies, unionisation in the private sector is effectively non-existent.

More than half of the workers employed in the private sector do not even have the option to join a trade union nor be covered by a collective agreement.

Despite the good work the present unions do for their own members, the rest of the working class has lost ground in terms of income and protections.

Non-unionised workers have no power to improve their position. They are at the mercy of their boss.

As a result, when workers in non-unionised workplaces have an employment dispute, they must seek support from an expensive lawyer, lay advocates, or a friend. Most exploited private sector workers receive no access to justice. Unscrupulous bosses know this.

The increase in vulnerable migrants and widespread casualisation, along with the growth of labour hire companies and dependent sole contractors, has seen the number of precariat workers in New Zealand explode.

This has led to a culture of fear and isolation. As a result, workers’ power, incomes, job security and self-confidence have declined.

The situation is similar in most Western countries, and if we don’t shake it up, the international union movement in the private sector will descend into irrelevancy.

It is unacceptable that we morph into a network of staff associations for relatively better-off workers. That would be a betrayal of our history and all the working-class fighters who came before us.

A new activist movement
The old ways no longer work for the overwhelming number of private sector workers. The only question any serious worker rights activist must consider, is not if we protect and organise all workers, but only: how?

It is clear we need new forms of organisation.

I have been part of the One Union project group for the last three years. We have been actively trialing various models in our attempt to find a sustainable and effective way to meet the new challenge.

We believe we now have the solution. Today we announce the formation of the UTU for Workers Union.

The mission of UTU for Workers Union
Our purpose is to build a mass movement to stop exploitation – migrant and non-migrant – and end unchecked workplace abuse that non-unionised workers routinely suffer.

The use of UTU is deliberate. We summarise it in Māori terms – justice. When a victim is exploited or abused, their mana has been diminished and it must be restored. That is UTU.

As the first step, we have to actually help individual workers with their immediate problem. For the last year we have been providing representation to any worker from non-unionised workplaces who needs help.

The jungle of predator employment advocates and lawyers scamming vulnerable workers is sickening. They get screwed by the boss, and then again by their advocates, some of whom do sweetheart deals with bosses.

The advocate gets their fee, but the worker is forced to accept a few crumbs. Simply outrageous.

The good news is that when we have backed up our representation with a direct campaign, through picketing or media exposure, the exploitative boss has realised the power of the worker feeling they have got justice.

More careful in future
The boss knows to be more careful in the future. We have had some success in having bosses agree to ongoing compliance monitoring.

We have found that workers want to join a union. In almost all occasions, there is no union. If there is, they don’t use their resources to help non-members.

That might make sense if you look at unions as business units, but completely wrong if you see them as a justice movement for workers. There are only two categories of workers – those in unions, and those we must get into unions.

Up until now we have not asked workers to join us. From today we will accept workers as members and supporters.

Our membership is open to everyone, whether they are employees, or dependent contractors. We will help any worker who is in distress.

What must unite us is not what work we do, or who our boss is. Instead, we have to join together as a working class.

The old and true clarion call, “an injury to one, is an injury to all”, is as relevant today as it ever was. All unionists must fight for justice for all workers.

If any applicant is from a unionised site or sector covered by another union, then of course they must join that union. It must be noted that we are solely focused on the vast majority of non-unionised private sector workers who are exploited and abused in the non-unionised world.

By having an inclusive and broad strategy, we believe many workers and allies will step up to build a powerful workers movement dedicated to stopping exploitation and workplace abuse.

How do we rebuild working class confidence?
We can do this in three phases.

Help victims first
If we claim to be pro-worker, we have to earn the right. Our first priority is to resolve individual workers’ immediate problems. This is the most important thing to anyone. Support any victim, and they become a union ally – and in time, an activist.

We currently force exploiters to pay thousands of dollars of unpaid wages and backpay legal underpayments. We have prevented unfair sackings, stopped harassment and bullying, and won compensation and fair outcomes for hundreds of workers.

In the last year alone, we have won hundreds of thousands of dollars for victims. This is only the tip of the iceberg. We need more people to help. Until they do, exploitation will continue.

Our case work is now carried out by the One Union Trust, which operates in partnership with the union. The trust has a dedicated legal team of three lawyers led by a former senior trade union official.

Confront criminal bosses directly
We have a dedicated UTU Squad. We hold UTU Vigils for Justice actions directly outside the businesses and homes of exploiters and abusers. Every community needs a local UTU Squad.

We name criminal bosses and expose injustices on our union website, utu.org.nz, and our Facebook page, @UTUForWorkersUnion.

We host a weekly radio programme on 104.6 Planet FM, Wednesdays at 12.40pm. We tell the truth about these exploiters and abusers.

We organise online Action Station petitions to mobilise support for victims, and let communities know about their local exploiters.

Build solidarity
After a boss has been found to breach minimum employment standards, we monitor compliance and enforce legal minimum codes. Thousands of workers in small workplaces don’t get their minimum entitlements. We can fix that through constant vigilance.

We also monitor visa compliance. 350,000 workers are reliant on a boss for their visas.
Workers will feel safer by regular check ins. Over time, we will patiently build a more collective confidence in their workplace.

Migrant exploitation
The most exploited and abused group of workers are migrant workers on temporary visas. Any project to eliminate worker exploitation in New Zealand must include campaigns that focus on migrant workers. We are judged as unionists on our commitment to the most vulnerable members of the working class.

The Migrant Workers Association partners with us and leads this work. The One Union Trust provides practical case representation for victims. MWA and UTU spearheads campaigns that rally the community against specific cases of injustice. Their fight is our fight.

A call to action
Progressive activists have to step up now. We need action. Go to this page for 8 practical steps you can do right now.

Matthew “Matt” McCarten is a New Zealand political organiser and trade unionist, of Ngāpuhi descent. He has been involved with several leftist or centre-left political parties, most prominently as the leader of the Alliance.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Today is Labour Day in New Zealand – the public holiday set aside to celebrate the rights of workers and in particular the right to an eight-hour working day.

The great irony is that like many New Zealanders I am working today because I’m a contractor and not an employee with rights to holiday pay.

There was a time when all the shops and businesses were closed on Labour Day and parades were held to celebrate the dignity of working people and their battle against exploitation – a day when we trumpeted the 40-hour week, equality of opportunity and the family values that once made us proud to be Kiwis.

READ MORE: Fighting for the eight-hour working day

So what went wrong? What happened to that New Zealand I grew up in where the weekend really did mark the end of the working week?

Answer – the economics and politics of selfishness.

In 1984 – the Labour Party introduced the economic theory of neoliberalism we’ve been living under ever since. A theory that says the state shouldn’t interfere with the financial marketplace, that workers are a “resource” not our friends and neighbours, and the public utilities we all paid for with our taxes could be relabled as “assets” and sold off to the highest bidder.

An ideology that saw National undermine collective bargaining with the (now defunct) Employment Contracts Act that took us down the path of a low wage economy in which a lot of us are working longer and harder for less.

Economic errors
Thirty six years on, Labour now says it has seen the error of its economic ways, but it has really only been the advent of covid-19 that has forced them to realise that governments ought to be active in the marketplace because trickle down theory where pampering the rich will somehow help the poor doesn’t work.

Certainly if Labour continue to refuse to implement the recommendations of their own tax reform working group then I’m not optimistic the many are going to start benefitting from our economy again instead of a wealthy few.

And … I don’t expect to see a return to the 40-hour week anytime soon.

Damn it. ?

If you ARE getting a break today – great! Have a good one!

Bryan Bruce is an independent filmmaker and journalist. The Pacific Media Centre is publishing a series of occasional commentaries by him with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Staff of the regional University of the South Pacific have condemned the Fiji government’s “dictatorial” action in freezing a $28 million grant, accusing it of holding the governing University Council to ransom and jeopardising the future of students.

“Fiji is reneging on its commitment to its people and the region,” say the staff in a letter to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.

The letter, signed yesterday by the university’s academic Association of USP Staff (AUSPS) and the USP Staff Union (USPSU) leadership, was sent in support of the 29,000 students following the grant suspension statement by the Attorney-General that has “sent shock waves across this regional institution to which 80 percent of graduates from Fiji are indebted”.

Attorney-General Aiyaz Saiyed-Khaiyum was reported as saying the Fiji government – as the largest grant contributor to the USP – was concerned at the “continuous question marks about the lack of adherence to the principles of good governance in the day to day administration of USP”.

This came after months of conflict at the regional institution between the University Council and the Fiji-based university management.

It also followed recent exoneration by the University Council of popular Canadian vice-chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia who had been targeted by two senior Fiji officials over his reforms.

Yesterday’s staff letter said: “It is poor governance when a single member state of the USP Council attempts to dictate its course of action.

Critical financial position
“The staff of the USP strongly object to the AG and Minister for Economy’s decision to cease Fiji’s grant contribution to the USP,” the letter said.

“This places the university in a critical financial position, jeopardising the education of Fiji students (80 percent) and Fiji staff (80 percent).

“This decision is viewed as an assault on the Fiji students and staff who, to date, in this covid and pre-covid environment of 2019 have been able to continue their education and work with minimum impact under the current vice-chancellor’s prudent leadership and council oversight.

“The government is seen to be using Fiji students and staff to dictate to and to hold the USP Council to ransom whilst holding a ‘gun’ to the head of the vice-chancellor and president.

“The action is tantamount to ‘cutting off USP students and staff legs at their knees’ and therefore their lifelines to coping with living in the current and post-covid environment.

“Not only will hundreds of families suffer, the quality of support and education for USP students in Fiji and the region will be seriously affected due to the domino effect of this decision.

“The question being asked is, why would the government use such strong arm tactics and punitive action to jeopardise the education of its youth who are their voters and the next generation of leaders when the USP’s supreme governing body of 12 regional states and development partners have spoken,” the letter said.

‘Mere pawns on political game’
“Rather than being treated as valuable citizenry, it appears that all are mere pawns
in a political game.

“The vice-chancellor and president is doing what every government, university, corporation and family business in the world needs to do to survive – reflect, redesign and reorganise.

To date, said the letter, no staff member had lost a job, no student had been refused admission – except for “mandated academic reasons” – and there had been an increase in student enrolments.

“The gravity of this decision and its implications require serious reflection on the basis of the decision and in-depth reconsideration by the Fiji government for the greater good of the students of Fiji and our Pacific `vuvale’ [canoe sail].”

Fiji Labour Party Leader Mahendra Chaudhry has branded the Economy Minister’s suspension of Fiji’s grant to USP as “simply childish”, reports Fiji Village radio.

Chaudhry said it looked like Fiji wass on its own, “like a lone wolf crying foul”.

The FLP leader said he was concerned that students’ university education would be affected and it would also affect the reputation of USP.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz