ANU staff vote no confidence in leadership, university dismisses vote as ‘vehicle for disinformation'

Around 760 National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU)-aligned staff have overwhelmingly taken a vote of no confidence against Australian National University (ANU) leadership.

The onslaught of criticism towards ANU leadership continues with an overwhelming vote of no confidence in the chancellor, the Honourable Julie Bishop, and the vice-chancellor, Professor Genevieve Bell – spurred by a culmination of budget-related blunders.

Recent revelations have shown that ANU leadership incorrectly estimated the 2024 budget deficit, overestimating the total by more than $60 million. As reported by The Australian Financial Review, ANU leadership revealed to staff that the deficit had been revised to $140 million, down from the original projected $200 million.

It was also found that Bell had kept a paid role with tech giant Intel after joining ANU leadership, including during her tenure as vice-chancellor while she was on a $1.1 million salary.

The overestimation of the budget only fanned the flames of allegations from staff members that the university was intentionally buffing the deficit to justify their cost-cutting measures, which have included job cuts, the axing of courses, and the attempt to erase a staff pay rise.

In an open letter to the vice-chancellor and members of the ANU executive, members of the ANU community expressed “deep concern” over the “rushed and opaque nature of the budget cuts and organisational changes currently being rolled out under the university-wide Change Management Proposal (CMP)”.

“It appears that these cuts are being carried out on the basis of questionable financial data and pose a serious institutional risk, threatening ANU’s reputation, staff morale, research quality, and educational excellence,” said the open letter.

Speaking on the vote, NTEU ACT division secretary Dr Lachlan Clohesy expressed that the ball is now in the ANU council’s court.

“It is now up to the ANU council to deliberate on whether they believe the positions of the chancellor and vice-chancellor are still tenable,” Clohesy said.

“It’s not just the very serious conflicts of interest. It’s the culture of fear and intimidation, the financial mismanagement, the job cuts, blaming staff and referring to them as ‘inefficiencies’, the parking fee hike, the childcare closures, and attempting to take away a staff pay increase.

“ANU leadership overestimated the size of the 2024 deficit by more than $60 million. They then disestablished the College of Health and Medicine, attempted to take away a staff pay increase, and cut jobs and courses based on their erroneous budgeting. ANU staff demand accountability.”

In a previous statement made before the results of the vote, ANU chief operating officer Jonathan Churchill called the actions of the NTEU in question, expressing his concern that the vote would be used as a “vehicle for mis- and disinformation”.

“To be clear, this ‘vote’ has no legal or binding effect. The NTEU is not able to choose the leadership of our council or the university. But I am concerned about the vote as a vehicle for mis- and disinformation. The NTEU’s recent all-staff meeting about the vote used information selectively to question the serious financial challenge we face,” Churchill said.

“My concern about the NTEU’s ‘vote’ is about the impact on our community, and the white noise of confusion and angst it creates ...”

In a statement made to HR Leader, Clohesy retorted that the only expressions of disinformation were being presented by ANU leadership – pointing towards the budget overestimation as a clear example.

“The disinformation we’ve seen has come from ANU leadership. We now know that the projected 2024 deficit given by ANU leadership was wrong by more than $60 million. ANU leadership have presented the situation as being worse than it is,” he said.

“They have either catastrophised the finances to justify job cuts, or they’ve mismanaged the finances so badly that they’ve made a $60 million mistake.

“This is a non-trivial error. The College of Health and Medicine is gone because of it. The Centre for Learning and Teaching is gone because of it. 109 positions are gone because of it, and the December pay rise for staff was very nearly gone because of it.”

Accusations of ‘sexist’ tactics

During a sit-down interview with the ABC, vice-chancellor Bell alleged that the NTEU was resorting to sexist tactics throughout its campaign against the conduct of ANU leadership.

“Sexism is alive and well and living in Australia. So is a little bit of tall-poppy activity,” said Bell.

“Running a no-confidence campaign which has been, by their own admission, personal. It’s been a reputational campaign targeted at me. My face is blasted all over it in a way they never did with my predecessor.”

When the ABC asked her whether she believed that the union was “targeting” her on the basis that she was a woman – Bell replied, “absolutely”.

In statements made available to HR Leader, NTEU national president Dr Alison Barnes refuted Bell’s claims, stating that her gender was irrelevant in the union’s criticism.

“The claim that gender has played any role whatsoever in the union’s criticism of ANU’s leadership isn’t just factually incorrect, it’s insulting to the feminised workforce that has disproportionately felt the brunt of terrible mismanagement decisions,” said Barnes.

“I know from my research as an academic in business management and industrial relations that when you stifle criticism and engage in leadership groupthink, it has a negative impact on the culture and fabric of an organisation.”

“There hasn’t been a single reference to gender in any of the NTEU’s scrutiny of Professor Bell.”

Barnes pointed out that “a comparison to her predecessor doesn’t equate with the facts”.

“Only Professor Bell was working for Intel while also in the vice-chancellor role. Only Professor Bell tried and failed to pressure staff into forgoing a 2.5 per cent pay rise. Only Professor Bell proposed massive job cuts based on a budget deficit that was overstated by $60 million. Only Professor Bell allegedly threatened to ‘hunt down’ senior staff who blew the whistle on cuts,” said Barnes.

“The NTEU didn’t take a backwards step in criticising Brian Schmidt when he was vice-chancellor, including the financial mess that he left for Professor Bell.”

“We won’t resile from applying the same fair scrutiny to the current leadership’s massive governance failures and shocking financial mismanagement.”

In terms of the result of the vote, Barnes called for “real reform” as a key measure to overturn the “terrible mismanagement” undertaken by ANU leadership.

“What does it take to lose your job as the boss of an Australian university in 2025? The ANU scandals have piled up higher than the Telstra Tower, yet the council continues to back in a vice-chancellor and chancellor who have both failed to take any responsibility for terrible mismanagement,” said Barnes.

“The appalling thing is this is emblematic of the deep governance crisis we are seeing right across the country. We need real reform to stop the conflicts of interest and cultural decay of our public universities.”