Central University of Technology (CUT) challenges: input by stakeholders

Higher Education, Science and Innovation

09 February 2022
Chairperson: Ms N Mkhatshwa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Video

The Committee met virtually with the Council and management of the Central University of Technology in the Free State for a briefing on governance, teaching and learning and responded to matters raised to the Committee in writing by some of its stakeholders. The Committee also received briefings from the SRC; Institutional Forum; NEHAWU; NTEU; Alumni Association and Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET).

CUT's academic year commences on 14 February, with 52% of students on campus for face-to-face classes under adjusted lockdown level 1 (for those needing labs and practicals as well as first-year students for one module). Announcements on additional students who may be requested to return for face-to-face classes will be released on 16 Feb 2022 latest. All students will start with online teaching on 14 Feb 2022, and those physically returning will arrive 1 Mar 2022 to allow enough time to arrange accommodation. The academic year would be completed at end of 2022.

The briefing covered former the former Vice-Chancellor's disciplinary hearing; registration and enrolments; disbursement of NSFAS funding and allowances; financial position; filling the VC position; safety and security measures against gender-based violence; student housing and infrastructure projects; challenges and successes; dropout and throughput rates and applied research and innovation.

CUT stakeholders expressed concerns about lack of consultation by management and Council; sexual harassment in the institution; bullying and intimidation; corruption and collusion by officials on procurement; lack of maintenance of student residences; corruption linked to infrastructure projects. The CUT Council told the Committee that those matters were historical and many of them were already addressed by the institution.

The Department primarily focused on governance at CUT and provided an analysis including the interventions implemented to restore stability.

Members asked about the sexual harassment policy and review of GBV policy; governance; critical vacant positions; culture of fear; vaccination policy; 'missing middle' students; historic student debt; third-income stream; Council member resignations; legal costs; supply chain management; naming of buildings and facilities. The Committee requested written reports on some matters and looked forward to the Ministry approved intervention plan. It requested all stakeholders to act in good faith and for the Department to support the institution to resolve its challenges.
 

Meeting report

Central University of Technology Council on Oversight hearing
Prof Alfred Ngowi, CUT Acting Vice-Chancellor and Principal, spoke on the state of readiness of the institution for the 2022 academic year; the outcome of the former VC’s disciplinary hearing; registration and enrolments; disbursement of NSFAS funding and allowances; financial position; filling the VC position; safety and security measures against gender-based violence; student housing and infrastructure projects; challenges and successes; dropout and throughput rates and applied research and innovation.

Ms D Mahlatsi took over as acting chairperson as the Chairperson had connectivity issues.

Student Representative Council: Bloemfontein Campus
Mr Bongani Bolawa, SRC President: Bloemfontein Campus, spoke about the successes of the Bloemfontein Campus; its residences; academics and finances. Maintenance is a problem for resident students. Most of the residence students are admitted but fail in trying to register. Some wardens are not cooperative with the SRC Residence and Accommodation Officer. They also face wardens that claim their residence is full but when the SRC checks residences like Eendrag, they are not yet full.

Accredited private accommodation exploit students and they are poorly maintained. The institution had not accredited more residences to accommodate the entire CUT student populace at Bloemfontein. Students were also concerned that residences were not named with African names and called for equity in the naming of the student residences.

Student Representative Council: Welkom Campus
Mr Mpho Litabe, SRC President: Welkom Campus, spoke about moving towards the old normal of face-to-face teaching and learning in nearing the defeat of Covid 19. His presentation touched on governance; administration; state of readiness for the 2022 academic year as well as finances.

Institutional Forum
Mr Tshepo Masoeu, Institutional Forum Chairperson, covered challenges experienced by workers and students and recommendations on the state of governance at CUT and general observations.

National Education, Health and Allied Workers’ Union
Dr Mantoa Molete, CUT lecturer and NEHAWU representative, provided an overview of the climate of the university; governance crisis; management issues; collapse of the Registrar division; procurement irregularities; involvement of NEHAWU in decision making and recommendations.

National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU)
Dr Titus Williams, NTEU Branch Chairperson, focused on matters related to the workers including safety of employees, students closing the gates and holding staff hostage as a regular occurrence at Welkom campus; changing of academic year programme without taking into consideration the pressure on staff and inconvenience such as cancelling leave and holiday plans; indecisive action by management to act against those causing chaos making teaching and learning impossible; lack of action on whistleblower reports and lack of feedback on investigations.

The Chairperson said that the alumni of the institution have on multiple occasions written to the Committee about their concerns. Although not normally receiving briefings from alumni, the Committee resolved to allow the alumni to share what may not have been already covered today.

Alumni Association oral presentation
Mr Mbuyiselo Frans, CUT Alumni Association president, said that the status quo remained the same, instead, it becomes more and more apparent that there is no relationship between the Alumni Association and the Council of the institution. The Alumni Association was not recognized by the institution, but it would continue to send correspondence to the Committee on serious matters arising at the institution.

Department of Higher Education and Training (DHET)
Dr Nkosinathi Sishi, DHET Director-General, indicated that the Department had listened carefully to all the submissions by the stakeholders. This helped diagnose the challenges in the institution, especially matters raised by the other stakeholders of the institution.

Dr Thandi Lewin, DHET Chief Director: Institutional Governance and Management Support​, gave an analysis of the state of affairs of the University including the interventions implemented to restore stability. It looked at the background to the instability and the actions taken to resolve matters.

Dr Sishi said that the level of reporting from higher education institutions was not comprehensive enough and it needs to be investigated. There were serious allegations about sexual harassment. The Department cannot look at this matter technically but as a broader government campaign on the scourge of gender-based violence in the country. The Department has noted these allegations and will closely investigate the situation internally and implement consequence management. He was concerned about the collusion of stakeholders in the institution, particularly students and management. If this is true, there may be more investigation warranted. There were concerns about lack of consultation with stakeholders which was not aligned with our democratic principles, and DHET encourages a culture of consultation and engagement amongst stakeholders. It is very strange for people to drift away from engaging with stakeholders solely based on disagreements. Lastly, the Department has noted the request for intervention by the Minister. These engagements have empowered the Department to initiate an urgent conversation to deal with urgent matters including the state of the infrastructure and academic programmes.

He thanked the unions for the angle they have brought in the conversation and for bringing a balanced view on what is happening in the institution.

Discussion
The Chairperson said that she was looking forward to the interventions by the Minister and the Department. There is a need for greater intervention. She also shared concerns about the monitoring of the institutions by DHET and appealed to the Department to enhance its monitoring and oversight mechanisms.

She wanted to understand a mutual separation agreement in relation to consequence management. Where does that leave parties if one party was found to be at fault? Systems must be put in place to alleviate a repeat of offences and wrongdoing in our institutions.

Ms J Khoza (ANC) agreed about the lack of consequence management. The reports submitted today showed that there was this consistency in how the matters were dealt with. She encouraged CUT to enhance its communication channels with its stakeholders.

She requested more details in writing about damage to the infrastructure. Is there a language policy? Does the Council have a plan and timeline for filling vacant positions? What is the gender representation and racial composition of the Council? Does the Council have a code of conduct, because NEHAWU said that there was a culture of fear at the institution?

She asked NEHAWU if it had opened cases on the allegations it made. Is there inclusion of people with disabilities in the composition of management? What does the vaccination programme entail and what is the response from students. Are there any implications for students or staff members that do not want to be vaccinated?

Ms C King (DA) commented on the challenges in consultation amongst the stakeholders. She supported the suggestion that there must be a review of the Council operational model. It would be helpful if the Council did conduct the review. She requested an update on the sexual harassment and code of conduct policies.

CUT has mostly National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) students but how is it assisting the 'missing middle' students to also have access? What is the percentage of students with historic debt? She noted 'Other Income' and asked if CUT has a third-income stream. How is Higher Health assisting students with psychological turmoil?

The SRC mentioned that there were challenges with the Fundi IT System and asked for the challenges that may affect students in the long run. Given that most students were funded through NSFAS, was the funding list made available to the institution by NSFAS? If not, did NSFAS indicate when this will be?

Ms King asked for a report on Covid-19 expenditure and procurement details for Covid-19 related goods and services.

Ms D Sibiya (ANC) asked NEHAWU for the reasons for the resignation of previous Council members. Is it true that the tenders were awarded to the same companies and that poor quality Covid-19 personal protective equipment (PPE) was sourced? She was concerned about the staff held hostage at the Welkom campus as noted by NTEU mentioned in its presentation earlier.

Mr T Letsie (ANC) appreciated the Director General's overview, particularly his concern on the way the University reported the GBV and sexual harassment. We must emphasize the point that GBV is a pandemic in this country and universities are microcosms of our society. He implored CUT to take this matter seriously. This matter cannot be responded to as a “by the way matter”.

On the dropout rate, what was the cause of the decrease from previous years? He asked the Department to provide the overall dropout rate in the system and the reasons behind it. Has a thorough review been conducted to ascertain the reasons for these dropout rates?

On the pass rate, what would have contributed to the positive pass rate given the shift from contact teaching and learning to hybrid?

He asked if the Council members who resigned were already replaced and the impact of those resignations on the oversight function of the Council. What was the gender representation of those who resigned from Council; what was Council's gender representation then and now? Are there clear policies and disciplinary procedures for disciplinary action against the Vice-Chancellor for transgression of the policies of the institution? He asked if paragraph 58 of the CUT statute applied to the Vice-Chancellor and the Deputy Vice-Chancellor? Is Council of the view that those provisions are adequate and who is responsible for their disciplinary hearings?

Mr Letsie said that there were too many acting positions in the Council, and at all levels of management, and he sought details on the current acting positions. What is the process going forward to ensure that those positions are filled?

It is a serious allegation that the former VC turned a blind eye to an allegation of sexual harassment by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. Has the Council investigated this allegation and what is the status of the investigation? The findings and recommendations of the investigation may be shared with the Committee. Did the university offer support to the complainant of sexual harassment as per the institution policy? If so, what kind of support is offered to complainants of sexual harassment?

How much was expended by the university over the past two years for external legal services and which companies were contracted? What was the process for appointing these companies and who was on the receiving end of these appointments? Who were the cases representing?

How much was spent on the infrastructure grant over the past two years by the institution? He also sought details on these projects and their status quo.

The students have raised concerns about the appointment of private service providers for student accommodation and the quality of these student residences. How many registered students are currently living in the university residences?

Ms N Marchesi (DA) said that she was incredibly disturbed by this institution. She had visited CUT and the student residences, and it looks like there are serious issues in every facet of this university. It looks like everything is in disarray.

She was not pleased that the political leadership was seldom present in meetings when Members were discussing issues of a serious nature in higher education institutions. The Deputy Minister is supposed to cover on behalf of the Minister when he cannot make it. When the Minister comes to the Committee, he always requests to depart the meetings earlier than the scheduled time. Some of these discussions are difficult to have without political leadership. Parliament was now heavily on a hybrid system, and it can be flexible to accommodate the Minister.

When it comes to management there are reoccurring problems. In 2005, a member of her family wrote an examination at CUT and one of his papers got lost. Today, students are still complaining about the same concerns and they are now encompassed by other matters such as plagiarism. She was not pleased with the way the CUT Council was dealing with the problems. We cannot seem to find solutions and now with the absence of political leadership, it is difficult to make decisions in Parliament about how the Department will resolve these challenges. We cannot always be putting higher education institutions under administration.

She expressed her disappointment in the institution and how it continually lets students down. Student accommodation is in a bad state and the Committee needs to conduct an oversight visit because some of the accommodation were not conducive for students. We cannot have these discussions without concrete interventions that will be implemented for change.

Dr W Boshoff (FF Plus) agreed as CUT has been regarded as an upgrade since it changed from a technikon. This is testimony to the current situation of the institution. On the changes to the residence names, this is important as part of the liberation struggle. What are the proposed names?

The Chairperson said one of the greatest aims of this Committee is to get higher education institutions and the SETAs in good shape in terms of management and governance. This enables our students to obtain the required skills, tools and knowledge to be active participants in the economy and to change the lived realities of South Africans. One is required to serve the institution on signing an employment contract. If we do not have solid governance and management in the institution, we will not be able to change the state of our institutions. A lot can come out of this institution but if we cannot get it to a functional position, then constrained resources are being wasted.

She was concerned about the upskilling of staff. Lecturers are an important aspect of the institution and some of the greatest challenges in the sector are at the level where students engage on a day-to-day basis. Therefore, there need to be the required skills. We need to find a way to create better synergy between the two campuses of the institution. The Department should study how to synergise the SRC functions between the two campuses.

The appointment of the Vice-Chancellor must be a top priority for the Council and it must be hastily addressed. She suggested that the Council establish a platform on which stakeholders meet regularly to ensure that the challenges crippling the institution were ventilated and addressed. Why is the alumni structure not recognised? The Alumni Association communique will also be shared with the Department.

The Chairperson acknowledged the SRC initiatives to work with other stakeholders outside the institution to address the myriad challenges that students were experiencing. She raised a concern about the gold mines retracting their collaboration with the jewellery school. We need to put a tight leash on the private sector on the commitments they need to be making for the public sector to do the work it is mandated to do.

The Committee would like close monitoring to take place between the institutions and NSFAS. What seems to be a growing concern in the sector is Vice-Chancellors being a law unto themselves and the lack of disciplinary procedure for them to be held to account.

She raised a concern about the gender representation of management and wondered what the rest of the institution looks like. She asked for a spreadsheet outlining its gender representation.

The Chairperson agreed with Members' comments about GBV. This is not a matter that should be swept under the carpet. The low residential capacity to accommodate students was extremely concerning. It is 6% overall across the campuses. Are the students coming from communities that are close by or from afar?

She welcomed the infrastructure projects but requested written details of costs and timeframes.

The Chairperson raised a concern about the recycling of individuals who are not worthy to be given a second opportunity to head our institutions. People fail in one institution and are moved to another institution. The Department must look closely at this matter.

The allegations that surfaced today cannot be left without implementation of changes. The South African Union of Students (SAUS) has written to the Committee raising the same concerns and allegations that surfaced today. Importantly, how can these matters can be resolved? What can we do now to save this institution?

The Chairperson asked about the CUT medical device manufacturing technology project and how far along it is. These are the types of impactful projects we need to see coming out of our institutions. Lastly, she asked about the certification backlog at CUT as raised by the Alumni Association. These matters speak to a myriad of challenges in the assessment in the institution. These matters do not exist in isolation – they trickle down to other important aspects at CUT.
Responses
NEHAWU
Ms Molete replied that NEHAWU has reported some of the cases, but our members are fearful for their lives or being fired and end up withdrawing their cases. As a response to this, NEHAWU took a holistic approach to bullying and this matter was taken to the labour relations forum, which includes management and labour stakeholders. In this forum, we do express these concerns. The most recent issue that NEHAWU surfaced in that forum was the bullying of staff with co-morbidities who were instructed to work from home due to Covid-19 and the threats to cleaning staff if they do not come to work even though they provided medical certificates not to be on campus. One recent projects initiated by management and labour, in the presence of the former VC, is that the institutional review and transformation office was concerned about the institutional culture. Therefore, a new institutional culture was to be created as well as a new organizational structure. It has been two years down the line, but nothing has happened.

NTEU
Dr Williams replied that NTEU are represented at the Institutional Forum level, but the Council and management should consider bringing in labour in some capacity at Council meetings. Perhaps, some of these issues can be raised directly to Council. Labour was not even involved in the appointment of the Vice-Chancellor.

Institutional Forum
Mr Masoeu replied that there was a need to create a platform for communication. There is a lack of communication in the institution, which creates a lot of problems. A flow of communication can improve the institution substantially.

Student Representative Council
SRC President: Bloemfontein Campus, Mr Bongani Bolawa, replied that between NSFAS and CUT there was improper handling of administration. Fundi was introduced by the previous SRC team, but the implementation happened when the new SRC assumed office. Other students were not migrated due to the lack of a funding list from NSFAS. There was uncertainty on how allowances would be allocated to students because no documentation was generated for them and there were no specific amounts for the institution to give Fundi.

On the vaccination response, the SRC engaged with management this year and what is important to recognise is that students are not employees but clients. Therefore, the institution has no control over its clients but only its employees. It can motivate students to get vaccinated.

As for residence names, we will opt for neutral names that can satisfy both parties. The SRC wants to apply equity in the choosing of names. We cannot only opt for African names. Names such as Winnie Mandela and Chris Hani are neutral names that we can choose.

The quality of the residences is indeed compromised as they need maintenance.

Mr Bolawa asked in what capacity did SAUS represent the SRC? SAUS is a money-making scheme and a useless union because they do not represent the interests of the students. Even when they went to the CUT offices, they did not meet with the SRC or ask about the state of CUT from the students’ perspective. Therefore, most of them find work in DHET and its institutions. Some of the SRC issues are not necessarily emanating from CUT's management but the Office of the Minister. The Minister is not taking us seriously. He has never touched on quotas and on matters that are not mandatory for students.

In response to Ms Marchesi’s comment on the family member’s examination script that got lost; he replied that as an MP and Member of this Committee, what remedy have you suggested? Why did you wait for matters to get worse before bringing that to the table?

The Chairperson interjected and cautioned the SRC president that this was not a platform to call the Members to account. She requested the SRC president acknowledge that the Committee was trying to understand the CUT challenges raised to the Committee. He may not be a member of SAUS, but SAUS has brought many issues of great concern to this Committee on the challenges of the sector representing students. Ms Marchesi has chosen to use her own experience to demonstrate and advocate about the concerns of the institution. This is not a platform to hold Members of this Committee to account. What comes out of those examples from Members is to advocate for change in the institution.

Mr Bolawa also indicated that mandatory vaccination for students will not happen at CUT.

The SRC President: Welkom Campus, Mr Mpho Litabe, replied that one should always mitigate the challenges or experiences about which student have protested. Students have been struggling a lot with the maintenance of university infrastructure and student accommodation. One of the challenges at the institution is the high level of plausible deniability, no one seems to know who is responsible for what. Currently, the Welkom campus has been without water for a month. If it is not water, students are told that the geysers are not working. In a couple of days, students are expected back on campus and the residence students are already on campus and must go out to fetch water.

He was uncertain how to synergise the SRC functions between the two campuses due to the their geographical location. There was an attempt to do this, but it did not work out.

The SRC highly agrees with NEHAWU about the procurement irregularities. Currently, a sports field is under construction procured at a cost of more than R1 million but if you come to that field now, there is not even a tap and there are no lights to practice after sunset.

Mr Litabe agreed with about the lack of communication and the SRC has indicated to Council to get it more involved. The SRC always comes across decisions only through the pipeline and when it enquires, it experiences arrogant responses. As a stakeholder, they are most likely to go to the street and protest, but this should be avoided at all costs.

CUT Management
Prof Ngowi replied that management was not trying to be defensive, and it will respond to the concerns raised by different stakeholders. It would assist if this meeting took place physically. Management has started consultations with stakeholders on mandatory vaccinations. These consultations would dictate the direction CUT will take by ensuring that the concerns of its stakeholder are considered.

On third-stream income, we are all aware of the difficulties of obtaining funding from government. We have a unit at CUT dedicated to third-stream income generation for the institution.

CUT has a policy and procedure for naming buildings and facilities in the institution. The Director for Institutional Renewal and Transformation will be able to address this.

On the strategic nexus between the two campuses, it is as if they are not at par, and the inter-campus inequality has come up in Council and it considered to do a proper repositioning of the Welkom campus.

The causes of the dropout rates and changes in the pass rate were categorized into four which were: psychological and emotional turmoil, connectivity, remote assessment and support needed from lecturers. These causes were not a thumb-suck as a survey was done to get this information from the students. The survey was conducted in August 2021 to determine students’ experience with online assessments. The participating students were selected from courses and modules where student performance either dropped or increased by more than 20%. There were 240 students who responded and completed the questionnaire. Out of that number, about 70% were NSFAS beneficiaries; 14% were funded through informal employment; only 10% indicated that they were part of the 'missing middle' group. This is how the financial aspect comes in because the 'missing middle' students are the ones experiencing financial challenges when dropping out.

As for workload, the students indicated that the workload was too much because the semester time was too short. Some students did indicate challenges with connectivity. CUT did invite the students that were struggling with connectivity to come to campus.

As for the pass rate, the 74.65% for 2021 was not a final figure although in 2020 it was over 80%. In 2020, the institution had to quickly shift to online teaching and learning when first experiencing Covid-19.

On infrastructure maintenance, we are refurbishing our residences and procurement was underway. The constraint is finding alternative accommodation to house the students while refurbishment is taking place. There are a few considerations that management was looking at.

On voluntary vaccinations, CUT is consulting with organized labour stakeholders on 10 February and the Registrar has also consulted with the students. The sexual harassment policy is a policy that has been subject to regular reviews.

On the acting positions in management, CUT is putting a hold on filling vacancies because of the repositioning exercise that is being undertaken for the Welkom campus. Once, this process is completed, all vacant positions will be filled. A survey was conducted two weeks ago to test to what extent our employees are of the view about the repositioning.

Dr Sally Dzingwa, CUT Registrar, replied that the concerns Members raised were not new to the institution. When she joined CUT in July 2021, on her arrival in the first week she was greeted by student protest action. This was the last protest that the institution experienced. One incident occurred last week on 3 February at Welkom campus, was dealt with and did not result in any serious incidents. She was not oblivious to the challenges and they were being addressed by management.

She noted several information requests from the Committee and this will be sent to the Committee upon agreement on the timelines. The report on the disciplinary action of students will also be provided and the allocation of residences and the gender spread in management. We now have in-house legal counsel, and we hope with that appointment CUT will lessen the degree of money spent on outsourcing legal counsel. CUT will provide an overview of the amount spent on legal fees. This matter was recently discussed in the Council meeting and all relevant information will be forwarded to the Committee as requested.

As for the technology project, strides have been made on that and funding has been approved by Council. Management was in the process of acquiring another building to house some of the state-of-the-art equipment for it. Ultimately, the purpose is to develop a medical device so that together with government we can create solutions to South African problems.

Mr Milingoni Nemutshili, Acting CUT CFO, replied about the percentage of historical debt, the usage of Fundi, MERSETA, procurement and Covid-19 expenditure and appointment of the contractor for the sports field in Welkom as well as the list of self-funded and NSFAS students. On historical debt, this was R1.9 billion as of 31 December 2021. 50% of this is for NSFAS beneficiaries and this was due to missing information between CUT and NSFAS. By the end of December, the missing information was clarified and resolved. For self-funded students, from before 2017, it is about 50% at R946 million.

On communication, since his appointment in July 2021, he met with the SRC leadership and its finance office regularly, hence there was no protest since his appointment. There was now stability, and he meets with the SRC leadership weekly, even on weekends. The last meeting with the SRC was a workshop for two days on the state of readiness of the institution and the finance guidelines.

On the Manufacturing, Engineering and Related Services Sector Education and Training Authority (MERSETA) matter, a detailed report will be provided to the Committee.

On the 'missing middle' students, CUT has issued registration guidelines for 2022 so that it is based on one's income threshold so that these students can afford tuition. The income development unit is also marketing information in such a way that when the funding is received, they divert this towards funding for the 'missing middle' students.

On the same supplier being appointed, this matter was referred to the risk unit and an investigation was done. This indicated that there were institution officials that colluded but they resigned before the finalisation of the process. The investigation report is available and can be provided to the Committee. There was a call from the different structures in Council recommending lifestyle audits on the officials responsible for procurement. The Office of the Chief Audit is currently appointing someone to conduct the lifestyle audits.

CUT spent R13 million on Covid-19 expenditure by the end of December 2021. We are required to submit and suppliers’ names and details to the Institutional Forum.

On 'Other Income', CUT had a list of 56 funders for 2021 and it received R31 million from those funders last year.

On the contractor appointment for the Welkom sports field, although this was done before his time, he will gather all the relevant information in detail and forward it to the Committee.

Mr Thilivhali Mukondeleli, NSFAS Senior Manager replied that the 2022 funding list was shared with CUT on 2 February and yesterday the second list was shared. NSFAS spent most of yesterday trying to load the student results and the funding list of returning students will be shared today. The introduction of the POPI Act impacted how data can be shared. We now take the universal funding list and obtain the full admission list from the institutions. These lists are merged, and the institution is then able to communicate the funding to the institution.

Mr Matthew Rantsu, CUT Council Chairperson, replied that the institution was young but steadily growing. New Council leadership was elected about a year ago. There were tensions between the Ministry and CUT but when the new leadership assumed office, the Council committed itself to make the institution more accessible to the accounting authorities and to account better.

When he became a member of the Council in late 2017, he could attest to the claims about intimidation and bullying in the institution. He did raise this matter in Council and when the new leadership took over, things started to change. We find ourselves with a young Council in composition as most of the councillors are young and we find ourselves having to deal with the over-politicization of issues, which is a hindrance in a governance structure.

A concern was raised that VCs are above the law in universities, but this is not the case in this institution. The reason the VC was suspended was because he was suspected of not having acted according to policy about the sexual harassment charge. The Council immediately suspended him to investigate the matter. Every executive has the right to a mutual separation agreement with the employer. In the middle of the investigation, the VC requested to mutually separate. This information is all contained in the report on this matter. The sexual harassment charge that has been thrown around in the meeting was cleared after all the processes were followed in detail. The Deputy Vice-Chancellor was cleared of all charges by the CCMA irrevocably. There is no sexual harassment case that gets swept under the carpet in this institution. There was one case currently underway. The person alleged to have caused the sexual harassment was suspended immediately to allow the policy process to unfold fairly and freely. A report to this effect will be submitted to the Committee.

When the Institutional Statute: Central University of Technology was amended in 2017, we recognized the formation of a Convocation. Ordinarily, Convocation includes the Alumni Association. We have appointed an expert in the Alumni Office to establish the Alumni Association and we are busy with the terms of reference. This was supposed to be completed in the recent Council meeting, but members could not due to misalignment. Before the June 2022 Council meeting, Council would surely have finished the terms of reference. The Alumni Association is mentioned under Convocation in the statute.

CUT has all the policies that have been mentioned. It is also true that there has been a culture of intimidation in the institution, and it is mainly because we are a transforming university. Transforming the institution is a difficult task and it is a process but so much has changed. However, the concerns raised by some of the stakeholders are historical. We had a summit in 2021 where institutional culture was heavily dealt with, and a decision was taken to change the culture of the university. He welcomed an oversight visit by the Committee to CUT. Most of these concerns are historical and the current Council is a robust group and people are encouraged to speak and put matters on the table so that they can be dealt with.

He asked the Committee to grant the Council 10 days to respond to all the questions asked by Members in a detailed manner as the information required by Members needed to be in depth.

The Chairperson asked the Director-General to respond to the concerns that had come up. She noted that on another occasion he had spoken so well on the vaccination matter and how this sector should allow for the engagement of different views. She asked him to reiterate that point.

The biggest concern that emanated from the discussion is that we need to find synergy amongst the CUT stakeholders. There is a great sense of lack of consultation among the stakeholders – they feel left behind. What stands out is the need for a way forward and the Department or the Ministry’s intervention.

DHET Director-General response
Dr Sishi indicated that many who are here would agree that if you hear the report of the unions only, one will conclude differently and that is the case with the other stakeholders. It assisted the Department to hear the different stakeholders and it will provide the requested information on some of the concerns that have come up. This will be made available in the next 10 days.

He apologized on behalf of the Minister for not being present at the meeting. The Minister was represented by his advisor, Mr Mandela, and his Parliamentary Liaison Officer.

On the vaccine mandate and how institutions were responding to this, the President has guided all of us on this matter, which was in the context of collaborative work. It is crucial when we respond institutionally that we are in sync with the values underpinning our practices. We expect that our platforms will generate solutions through engagements with all sector stakeholders. He requested the Council Chairperson and management look carefully at the concern about consultation. We will support the university in its attempt to support the Minister's call encouraging students to vaccinate. Encouraging them to vaccinate is not the same as making it mandatory.

He agreed with the Council Chairperson that some matters raised today were historical and some are being dealt with in a highly regulated environment. The need for service delivery demands that we move with speed, especially on the residences that house our students.

The Department has allocated resources for maintenance of infrastructure and at the end of the financial year, these unused resources are brought back to the Department. The resources that are allocated for infrastructure must be spent, otherwise they will be diverted to other institutions. It would be a shame if these resources were not being utilized whilst CUT is experiencing these challenges with infrastructure and student residences.

It is urgent that the Department responds with a plan and it will be ready to table its interventions to the Minister and the Committee. We will consider the advice of the stakeholders and all the concerns that have come up during this engagement.

The Chairperson thanked the delegation for the engagement as much has been ventilated today. She welcomed the summit hosted by the university to create synergy amongst stakeholders. We all need to get to a point where we do what needs to be done.

The report on the mutual separation agreement with the previous Vice-Chancellor must be provided to the Committee. The Committee still had concerns about a mutual separation agreement with regard to consequence management. Matters that required a comprehensive response can be responded to in writing to the Committee. She would prefer the additional information submitted more quickly but the Committee will accept seven working days.

She implored all stakeholders to act in good faith and for the Department to continue to support the institution to resolve its many challenges.

The meeting was adjourned.

Audio

No related

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: