UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE


FROM: THE TASK TEAM VISTA CAMPUS:


TO : THE HONOURABLE CHAIRPERSON:


ATTENTION: Professor S Mayatula

RESPONSE TO THE COMMENTS OF PROF F Cv N FOURIE VICE- CHANCELLOR AND RECTOR UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE ON MEMORANDUM FROM VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN CAMPUS TASK: TEAM

We refer to the comments from our Professor F. C. v N. Fourie, Vice- Chancellor and Rector, University of the Free State, in respect to our memorandum submitted to your Committee, which you graciously brought to our attention. Thank you for the submission.


Kindly find attached our response to Prof. Fourie's comments. Hopefully, after studying our response closely, you and your Committee will find your way clear to take measures to resolve the creeping crisis that is becoming increasingly deep for the betterment of the Free State community.

Thank you.


VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN CAMPUS TASK TEAM

cc: The Speaker

Free State Provincial Legislature

Select Committee, National Council of Provinces (Copy of original memo attached herewith)

The Honourable Minister of Education

Dept. of Education, Pretoria

The Head of the Merger Unit

Dept. of Education, Pretoria


Honourable Professor S. Mayatula

Chair, Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Education

P. 0. Box 15

Parliament, Cape Town 8000

Dear Professor Mayatula

RE: COMMENTS OF PROFESSOR F.C.V.N. FOURIE. VICE-CHANCELLOR AND RECTOR. UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE ON MEMORANDUMFROM THE VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN TASK TEAM

1.Preliminary introduction

We are very grateful to you and your committee's decision to bring the above document to our attention. We very much appreciate the opportunity to comment on it and rectify some of the deliberate falsehoods which are contained therein and which have been carefully designed to mislead the Honourable Committee on the critical transformation issues raised by the members of the Task Team.


We find it very interesting that after 400 years of settler colonialism and apartheid in this country, and even after 10 years of democratic governance, white notions and perceptions on how to deal with black people and black institutions have changed little. Historical evidence abounds showing many occasions on which successive colonial and apartheid authorities have paternalistically proclaimed that black nationalist leaders engaged in the struggle against apartheid, in fact do not represent the broader population but only themselves. In fact, it is well known truism that on several occasions, the white minority regime has arrogated to itself the right to choose the "authentic" representatives of the black people. The vigorous denial by the Vice- Chancellor and Rector that the members of the Vista Bloemfontein Task Team (VBTT) is unrepresentative of the members of staff of the Campus squarely falls into this historical mould of dominant white racialistic perceptions about black people as a whole. The fact of the matter is that the various critical transformation issues raised by the Task Team have the full support of the academic and non-academic members of staff, the various unions and the pipeline students on the campus. It is simply untrue to say that the concerns raised by the task team were dreamt up by a small band of aggrieved individuals as the Vice- Chancellor's response to your Committee seems to imply.


The Task Team (made up of representatives from the different unions, academic and non- academic representatives as well as student representatives) was set up on the Vista Campus in 2002 to participate in the pre-incorporation discussions as well as oversee the incorporation process in general. This Task Team together with the University of the Free State (UFS) management after continuous deliberations produced a pre- incorporation agreement which was to guide the incorporation process from January 2,2004. The Joint Incorporation Management Team (JIMT), made up of representatives from Vista and UFS also agreed that the incorporation of Vista Campus is a process and not an event; and that negotiations/discussions will continue with UFS Management and the representatives of the different stakeholders of the Vista Campus (in particular all the different unions recognized by the defunct Vista University, non- Unionized staff members and student representatives).


The stakeholders on the Vista Campus thus deemed it necessary that the name "task team" be retained for their representatives who would evaluate the incorporation process, as well as negotiate and discuss with the Management on the incorporation process. It is this team of selfless individuals who as representatives of all the stakeholders on the Vista Campus, after consultation with their constituencies, produced the memorandum to the Portfolio Committee on Education. The issues addressed in the memorandum include the unilateral change in our (Vista Campus staff) conditions of service, the shabby treatment of the pipeline students, the deliberate frustration of the transformation process and the, generally, negative attitude towards addressing issues Of equity, fairness and racism. Not only has the UPS Management disrespected the pre-incorporation agreement, but it has consistently promoted policies that negate the aforementioned which we, as Vista staff, feel passionate about. May we say here that these are not mere allegations since We have the facts to substantiate the issues raised. The UFS Management may be succeeding in maintaining an anti-transformation status quo (that was only seen in South Africa during the apartheid regime) by feeding the press with false claims of being leaders in transformation, and the Vice- Chancellor appearing at the web-page of the University clad in blanket, ostensibly, as a form of identifying with the indigenous people of this area.


Nevertheless, one cannot be hoodwinked. Ten years after democratic governance, any system based on racial and discriminatory practices and unfair labour practice must be changed for the greater good, externally if internal efforts fail. It is also our contention that the transformation of Higher Education, which was promulgated by the government is a national issue, which demands of any good citizen the obligation of ensuring that any government institution funded by the taxpayer to comply fully with the ministerial guidelines for mergers and incorporation. The Vice- Chancellor, by his unwarranted attack on the representative nature of the Task Team is, in effect, castigating members of the Task Team for standing up to their civic responsibility of ensuring fall compliance of government policy, which appears unfortunate. As a matter of fact the same Task Team, which the Vice- Chancellor now accuses of not being a representative body was curiously, invited by the UFS Management to participate in the negotiations of the alignment of the conditions of service of Vista staff (reference Appendix 1). We shall now deal with some of the other issues raised by the Vice- Chancellor in his letter to the Committee.


1.1
The question of the "full integration" of the Vista Bloemfontein staff members into the UFS

The Vice- Chancellor asserts that at the beginning of the incorporation process, it became clear that some staff were opposed to the incorporation. But, in fact, the evidence shows this to be untrue as it was the UFS Management which was very unwilling to engage in any meaningful process of consultations or dialogue. This was evidenced by the lack of response by the UFS Management to the various invitations issued by the then Vista


University Bloemfontein Campus Management to hold discussions/negotiations about the incorporation process as enjoined by the National Plan on Higher Education (NPHE). After a long delay, again at the invitation of the VBTT, the first meeting between the two institutions was initiated and hosted by Vista Campus. Indeed, we dare say that this uncooperative attitude of the UFS Management was deliberately designed 'to tactically delay and postpone the discussion and finalization of many of the critical transformation issues to the 2004 academic year when the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the UFS would have become a fait accompli. This explains why these issues have remained unresolved until this day.


1.2
The Vice- Chancellor further asserts that all the staff members have been fully integrated into the various structures of the UFS. This is presumably in response to the VBTT's complaint that the Vista Bloemfontein Campus is not represented in the various statutory bodies of the UFS such as the University Council, the Senate, the Management of the University and the various faculties. This is indeed the case at the "new" UFS arid we firmly stand by our position expressed in our earlier memorandum addressed to the Honourable Portfolio Committee. For example, at one of the pre-incorporation meetings, the Vice- Chancellor vehemently opposed to the total integration of Vista Campus into UFS management structures as recommended (ref. Appendix 2). Furthermore, even though the Vice- Chancellor finds it convenient to mention Mr. M. T. Sekoto, the Campus Coordinator, as a full member of the Executive Council of the UFS, thus representing Vista at the management level, the reality is different. The reporting line, as established by the UFS Management, renders Mr. Sekoto totally redundant and ineffective.


Members of the Vista Campus staff are expected to report to their various departmental heads and Deans who are comfortably based at the Main Campus. In effect, Mr. Sekoto represents no one but himself.

1.3 Subsequent actions and attitudes of the UFS Management as approved by the University Council have shown up the untruthful character of the Vice- Chancellor's protestations about the full integration of the Vista Bloemfontein staff into the UFS. It is by now well known that the UFS Management and Council approved salary increases to all the UFS staff in 2004 and 2005 excluding the staff on the Vista Bloemfontein Campus. In order to further convince the Vista Bloemfontein Campus staff members about how 'fully' they have been integrated into the UFS, they have even been denied the once-off Vice- Chancellor's Centenary bonus which was awarded to all UFS staff including those who joined the University as late as October 2004! It appears the Vice- Chancellor's position with regard to fall integration of Vista staff into the UFS is dictated by his whims. At the beginning of the year, in an address to Vista staff (ref. Appendix 3) we were made to believe that we were full members of the UFS community. In less than ten months, towards the end of the year, in giving out the bonus to commemorate the Centenary of the University, which we were made to participate fully, it did not suit the Vice- Chancellor's whims to regard the staff of Vista as an integral part of the UFS (ref. Appendix 4). So much for the integration of all Bloemfontein staff members into the UFS


2 The question of the future of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus

The Vice- Chancellor asserts that all discussions about the future use of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus have been inclusive. The attachment he has forwarded to the Committee as evidence of this. however, clearly points to the contrary as it shows that at no stage have any staff members of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus been included in any of the meetings convened to discuss the future of the Campus. Again, with respect to this matter, we very firmly stand by the position stated in our original memorandum to the Portfolio Committee. We, however, note with interest that subsequent to our memorandum and, in a meeting with the UFS Management at our request towards the end of the year, there has been a rearguard development, namely, a meeting has now been scheduled for February 2005 to discuss the future use of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus


3 The visit of the Department of Education Merger Unit

In his response, the Vice- Chancellor enthuses at the fact that neither the Merger Unit nor the Department of Education is aware of the issues raised by the Task Team in spite of the fact that they visited the UFS. With respect, it comes as no great surprise that the Department of Education and its Merger Unit were not informed about these issues precisely because they did not visit the Vista Bloemfontein Campus for reasons which we are not aware of. Had they done so and met a cross section of the staff and students of the Campus, they would certainly have come away with a far clearer and balanced picture of the real state of affairs of the Campus and the UFS as a whole. The fact that the Team from the Department of Education's Merger Unit returned from their visit, blissiully ignorant of 'the concerns raised by the Task Team, is more a testimony to the extent to which they were misled than a basis of the invalidity or untruthfulness of those issues.


The Vice- Chancellor claims that 'representatives' of Vista Bloemfontein Campus were present at the meeting with the Merger Unit and no concerns or issues were raised by the so-called Vista representatives. The truth of the matter is, in an apparent way of disorganizing the invited few, the invitation was extended at a very short notice, depriving the invitees the needed opportunity to consult with their respective constituencies. This ill-motive was, further, strengthened by a 'preparatory' meeting convened by the Vice- Chancellor where they were instructed not to raise any

"controversial" issues.


4
Appointment of Vista staff into VFS main campus and the alignment of conditions of service

The claim by the Vice- Chancellor that his "Executive Committee formally resolved that all vacant positions be filled with Vista Campus employees, should they qualify for such a position", may sound laudable but not with implementation conviction to the well- informed. There has rather been a deliberate and consistent effort to render Vista staff redundant. For example, all vacancies on the main UFS campus are advertised, and candidates must be fluent in both Afrikaans and English. No conscious effort has been made to fill any of these positions with Vista Campus staff. Furthermore, in some cases the tasks performed by Vista staff are transferred to the main campus while the staff remains at the Vista Campus with little or nothing to do. This is in clear contradiction to the pre-incorporation agreement concluded at the Joint Incorporation Management Team (JIMT), and clear attempt to render Vista staff redundant (ref. Appendix 7).


One is not unmindful of subterfuge efforts of engaging in a selective 'integration' of staff, even though the alignment of conditions of service has not been effected. In certain departments, mainly senior white staff members have conveniently been 'sucked' into various positions on the main campus. There are instances where promotions have been effected based visibly on race. When the issue was once raised at a meeting with the UFS Management by the union representatives of Vista, and an instance was cited, a visibly embarrassed Vice- Chancellor was simply dismissive: promotions are the preserves of various departments and not the Management, he chipped. The Honourable Portfolio Committee may find it interesting to investigate this and other matters as well.


The Honourable Committee is referred to 1.3 above. As a result of the discriminatory practices against the Vista Campus staff members, who are predominantly black, it has become necessary for the issue of the normal annual salary increase for Vista staff to be referred to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) to adjudicate on the issue. We want the Honourable Committee to note that in other Vista campuses involved in the incorporation process, ours stands unique as the other receiving institutions have gleefully awarded their incorporated Vista components their due annual salary increases.


5 The incorporation process and the question of the broad transformation of the UFS

It is useful to re-call the rationale for the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the UFS. This incorporation process is intricately linked to the broader goal of the transformation of tertiary institutions as spelt out in the report of the National Working Group (NWG) submitted to the Honourable Minister of Education in December 2001 and the NPHE. Some of the important policy goals which bear repeating here without intending to bore the honourable members of the Committee are the following: the broadening of access to higher education by the members of the previously disadvantaged communities, the development of excellent academic programmes relevant to national and regional development needs, the active promotion of equity goals in the recruitment of both staff and students, the development of more equitable, diverse, representative and transparent governance systems etc. With particular reference to the UFS, the NWG's recommendations for the reconfiguration of higher education in the Free State Province by the incorporation of the two Vista campuses were inter alia stated as follows:

" (i) Technikon Free State and the University of the Free State should be retained as separate and independent institutions. Both institutions, however, should give priority to issues of increasing access and equity, improving success rates and should apply themselves to the development of an enabling environment in which all South Africans can pursue their studies unhampered by social and cultural impediments" (NWG Report 2001:28).


In spite of the above, the UFS Management has insisted on maintaining racial boundaries in the form of racially segregated hostel, and this has been a bone of contention between the students and the UPS Management. One is even reticent in expressing concern about the continuous 'survival' of the name of Verwoerd, the apartheid demon, to one of the white hostels. Is this not meant to give a clear message to the overwhelming number of black students in the UPS and also an effrontery to the advocates of transformation of the institution, including the government? Furthermore, as stated elsewhere, language is being used as an exclusionary weapon for participation of any meaningful participation at meetings, including recruitment of staff.


All the issues raised in the original memorandum-submitted to your Committee by the VBTT fundamentally relate to the critical issue of the incorporation of the Campus into the UPS as a catalystic mechanism for the accelerated transformation of the UFS. It bears mentioning that at about the same time that the Vista Bloemfontein Campus prepared and submitted its memorandum to your Committee, an independent and differently constituted forum, namely, the Black Managers Forum (BMF) of the UFS prepared a memorandum raising similar issues and concerns. For the ease of reference of the Committee members, a copy of this memorandum is hereby attached (ref. Appendix


6
Other unresolved contentious issues

It is pathetic that Vista students who did not register in 2003 through financial and other reasons are not recognized by the UFS Management as "pipe-line" students. It is our considered opinion that the definition of pipe-line students should be as agreed upon by the JIMT (ref. Appendix 6 as marked with asterisk*) as Vista students are basically from the disadvantaged communities. Moreover, the Guidelines for Mergers and Incorporations specifically requests that pipe-line students should not be disadvantaged in any way. The affluent UFS, in its usual insensitivity to the plight of the disadvantaged community, would only regard Vista students registered in 2003, a year prior to the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus, to be regarded as a pipe-line student.


Furthermore, the University's time-table for academic programmes, in particular, including the writing of exams, which are centrally drawn, are clearly insensitive to the plight of the Vista black student who lives in the location and has to walk a long distance or board a taxi (in some cases change three taxis) in order to fulfill his/her academic

obligations.


7
Conclusion

We conclude by clearly staling that if the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the UPS is going to stand any chance of attaining any of the transformation goals of the NPHE, it is very necessary for both the Department of Education and the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Education to closely monitor the state of affairs on the ground. It is also very clear that any hopes of an internally generated meaningful change at the UFS will be misplaced unless it is externally driven. We hope that the Honourable members of the Committee will objectively consider all the issues raised in our original memorandum and in this response so that we can together develop a workable programme for the implementation of the transformation agenda which has been so clearly spelt out in the NPHE.

Yours faithfully


VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN TASK TEAM (VBTT)

cc: The Speaker

Free State Provincial Legislature, Bloemfontein


The Select Committee

"National Council of Provinces (Copy of original memo attached herewith

The Honourable Minister of Education

Dept. of Education, Pretoria

The Head of the Merger Unit

Dept. of Higher Education, Pretoria


UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE

Dear Prof. Mayatula

MEMORANDUM FROM THE 'VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN TASK TEAM'

The memorandum sent to you by the above-mentioned group of people has been forwarded to me by Mr Steve Morometsi with a request that the Portfolio Committee for Education should be provided with my comments.


Thank you for referring the memorandum to me. This not only honours acceptable protocol procedures, but also affords me the opportunity of providing you with a more balanced perspective of the processes concerning the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the University of the Free State.


Enclosed please find a fact sheet (with addenda) illuminating the planning processes that have been engaged in (and which are still continuing) with regard to the incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus and the future utilization of the campus. Also included are some facts pertaining to human resource issues raised in the memorandum.


I would like to highlight the following:

Vista Bloemfontein:

UFS; some residue of these sentiments still remain.


ACT
SHEET ON THE PROCESS OF PLANNING AND DECISION-MAKING FOR THE INCORPORATION OF VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN CAMPUS INTO THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE

1. INTRODUCTION:

The following summary of the proceedings of meetings and discussions that took place prior to and after the incorporation of Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the University of the Free State should provide some insight into the process followed, particularly with regard to planning for the future utilization of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus.


2.
PRE-INCORPORATION PHASE:

2.1 Management meeting 7 August 2002:

A first exploratory meeting to discuss the possibility of incorporating Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the University of the Free State took place.


2.2
Management meeting 13 March 2003:

At this meeting both parties (UPS management and Vista Bloemfontein Campus management) presented in broad terms their vision, mission and past performance.

Some possibilities on the optimal utilization of Vista Bloemfontein Campus were flagged by the UFS Vice-Chancellor, Prof. F. Fourie, who indicated that the reconfiguration process should be looking at various options on how to reconfigure the higher education landscape in the Free State. He foresaw that the UFS would be working together with other role-players to serve the Free State region through the reconfiguration of the HE landscape, taking into consideration the legal framework, and the principles of equity, financial sustainability, efficiency, etc. He requested the Vista Bloemfontein Campus to indicate its position on what focus the campus had for the future and how they viewed the optimal utilization of that campus.


At the same meeting agreement was reached with regard to the process and structures to drive the process, i.e. the establishment of joint working groups (JWGs) to deal with various matters.


2.3
Management meeting 21 May 2003

On 21 May 2003 a meeting between the management teams of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus and the University of the Free State reached agreement on the establishment of the following JWGs to deal with critical issues of the incorporation:

memorandum. The line of action taken by this group in presenting a memorandum with grievances to the Portfolio Committee is certainly not congruent with the spirit and practice of frank and open discussions and inclusive deliberations that the UPS is accustomed to. Furthermore, their approaching the Portfolio Committee directly without any prior consultation or notification of the UFS management is a serious breach of protocol which is certainty not customary at a university of high repute.

and are fully inclusive.


Please refer to the attached documentation for further information. I trust that this will shed some new light on the accusations made in the memorandum by the group of ex- Vista staff members. Should you require any further clarification, I would gladly respond to your request.


Of course the whole incorporation process is done in close co-operation with the Department of Education and specifically the Merger Unit of this Department. As it happens, the Unit visited Bloemfontein on 7 August 2004 to evaluate the process, also meeting with staff, union and student members of Vista. The Unit reported none of the allegations by the Vista Bloemfontein Task Team.


Thank you for your kind attention.


Yours sincerely


PROF.
F Cv N FOURIE

VICE-CHANCELLOR AND RECTOR

1) Student support and administration

2) Academic planning, including programmes, research and quality management

3) Human resources

4) Finances, including financial management and administration

5) Governance and management

6) Properties and services

7) Information and communication technology

8) Library and information services.


The meeting also agreed that the process of incorporation should occur in two phases. The first phase would be preparing for the incorporation-on 1 January 2004, and would include the streamlining and review of programmes.


The second phase would be developing the long-term vision or optimal reconfiguration of the Vista Campus facility (within the UPS as a multi-campus institution) in the interests of higher education in the Free State and the communities surrounding the two campuses in Bloemfontein.


A small task team of Prof. M. Fourie, Messrs Sekoto, Malherbe and Mokoena should plan for the process ahead. It may be necessary to have a document on broad strategic ideas on the higher education landscape in the Free State and the possible role of both institutions and other institutions in it. The aim of the document would be to facilitate –discourse on this, as well as guide decision-making on the optimal reconfiguration of the Vista. Bloemfontein campus in particular.

2.4JIMT meeting 9 August 2003

By now management meetings were conducted under the auspices of the Joint Incorporation Management Team (JIMT), consisting of the management teams of the UFS and Vista Bloemfontein Campus, the terms of reference for the JIMT and the Joint Secretariat were approved. A draft Memorandum of Agreement, and reports and recommendations from some JWGs were discussed.


2.5
JIMT meeting 10 September 2003

At this meeting it was agreed that there was a need to start discussions on the optimal utilization of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus with all stakeholders and that a process had to be designed toward this end. Subsequently the task team referred to above (see point 3) proposed a strategic planning process for the reconfiguration of the incorporated Vista Bloemfontein Campus of the UFS

(see Addendum 1).


2.6
JIMT meeting 13 October 2003

Since the very beginning of negotiations and discussions the UFS management has made it clear that they did not intend perpetuating racial segregation with regard to the offering of university programmes in Bloemfontein. It would therefore make no sense to continue enrollments of new students at the Vista Bloemfontein Campus in academic programmes that were already offered at the UFS main campus located only 10 kilometers away.


Following on recommendations by the Joint Working Group for Academic Planning, the meeting of the Joint Interim Management-Team held on 13 October 2003 took the following decisions with regard to academic programme offerings at the Vista Bloemfontein Campus for 2004:


(The M.Ed. programme has been offered by the UFS since the beginning of 2004, whereas the extended B.Sc. and the B. Tourism will be offered as from January 2005.)


3.POST-INCORPORATION:

Legal incorporation of Vista Bloemfontein Campus took place on 2 January 2004. As can be expected, the implementation of the incorporation and operational issues have taken precedence over strategic planning processes during the first part of the year.


3.1
Inclusion of Vista Bloemfontein Campus into management, academic and administrative structures

Since incorporation a management representative of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus has been a full member of the UFS Executive Management (the main management structure of the UFS, acting with delegated powers from Senate and Council). During the first semester, Prof. Talvin Schultz, campus head, served on the UPS Executive Management, and since 1 July 2004, the campus has been represented by Mr. Mike Sekoto, Vista campus registrar. Prof. Schultz also participated in the strategic planning retreat of the UFS Executive Management that took place in January 2004.


In addition, Vista academic staff has been fully integrated into all academic governance structures such as Faculty Boards and Senate, whereas administrative staff has been integrated into the normal operations and processes of support service divisions.


3.2
Alignment of conditions of service

Since the beginning of this year, numerous information sessions were conducted at the Vista Campus to elucidate staff members regarding the UFS Pension Fund and UFS Provident Fund, to ensure that employees will be able to make informed decisions on the different options available to them Staff members are expected to exercise their choices before 1 November 2004. In terms of the rules of the Vista Provident Fund and Vista Retirement Fund Regulations, a cash option as mentioned in the memorandum, is not permissible.


The total incorporation of staff and alignment of conditions of service will be negotiated between UFS Management and the representatives of the staff members at the Vista Campus. At present no rationalization exercise at the UFS Vista Campus is envisaged by Management. Management regards the employment and utilization of Vista Campus staff members as a priority, and as such, the Executive Committee formally resolved that all vacant positions be filled with Vista Campus employees, should they qualify f6r such a position.


UFS Management started with the negotiations regarding the alignment of conditions of service of the Qwaqwa Campus staff at the beginning of 2003 and foresees the conclusion thereof before the end of this year. Based on the complexity of such a negotiation process as well as limited capacity, it is foreseen that the formal negotiations between Management and the representatives of the four unions at Vista Campus will commence at the beginning of 2005. Preliminary meetings with the Joint Negotiations Forum were held at the beginning of this year with the aim of providing full details and information on UFS conditions of service.


During the Merger Unit of the Department of Education's visit on 17th August 2004 it was suggested that the University apply for assistance and we are in the process of doing so.


3.3
Appointment of Vista staff into UFS vacancies

As indicated above, every endeavour has been made to integrate Vista staff into the academic operations of the UFS. In cases where an over-supply of staff resulted from the incorporation, special arrangements were made to accommodate staff in other divisions. In addition, the Executive Committee of the UFS took a decision that Vista staff should receive preference with regard to any vacancies that occur at the University of the Free State. Outside appointments are only made in those cases where no appropriately qualified staff member is available at Vista.


Management respects the freedom of choice of all employees. It would be unfair towards staff members to transfer them to positions without their consent. However, it appeared as if Vista Campus employees were reluctant to apply for vacant positions, and as a result, the decision described above was taken by the UFS Executive Committee to enhance the utilization and employment of Vista Campus staff members.


3.3
Progress with strategic planning process for the reconfiguration of Vista Bloemfontein Campus

Due to the operational pressures resulting from substantive incorporation on 2 January 2004, as well as other pressures related to strategic planning (e.g. planning for the Qwaqwa Campus), progress with the strategic planning process for the Vista Bloemfontein Campus has been slower than expected. However, important consultations have taken place during the first half of 2004.

General of Free State Department of Education, Prof. Frederick Fourie, Vice- Chancellor of the UFS and Prof. Magda Fourie, Vice-Rector: Academic Planning.

This decision was taken as being congruent with the vision of establishing a facility that would address the education and training needs of particularly workers, mature and adult learners.


F.C.v N.
Fourie


15
September 2004


ADDENDUM
1


Proposed
strategic planning process for the reconfiguration of an incorporated Southern Campus (formerly Vista Bloemfontein) of the UPS

1. First phase:

The incorporation of Vista University Bloemfontein Campus as proposed in the National Plan for Higher Education and given notice of by the Minister of Education will probably come into effect on 1 January 2004. From that date Vista University will cease to exist and its Bloemfontein Campus, will become the Southern Campus of the University of the Free State.


As from 2004 first time entering students at the Southern Campus will enroll for UFS academic programmes (whether these are existing UFS programmes and/or "Vista' or adapted Vista programme will be the brief of the Academic Planning Task Team), whereas pipeline students will continue with Vista academic programmes until these are phased out in two to four years' time.


This phasing out of Vista academic programmes and gradual introduction of UFS academic programmes in a limited number of programme areas (mainly at undergraduate level) constitutes the first phase of incorporation. The introduction of UFS programmes at the Southern Campus will create opportunities for students to transfer to the Northern Campus at any time during their course of study with relative ease and minimal disruption. It is important that all students enrolling as from 2004 should be informed of and agree with the principle that the site of delivery of their academic programmers could change from the Southern Campus to the Northern Campus during their course of study.


2.Second
phase:

It is not the intention of the UFS to duplicate its academic programme offerings at another site within close range of its main campus in Bloemfontein in the long term, but rather to reconstitute and develop the Southern Campus into a unique facility for teaching, training and human resource development.

Therefore the reconstitution of the Southern Campus will be the focus of the second phase of incorporation. This reconstitution of the facility or site of delivery needs to be preceded and undergirded by a process of strategic planning, engaged in by the major institutional role-players.


2.1 Objective of consultations:

The objective of these consultations would be to elicit the opinions of a wide range of stakeholders regarding the role of a reconstituted University of the Free State in the development of the region and its various communities. Eventually a new scenario for higher education in the Free State or central region of the country should be developed in an inclusive manner.


2.2 Stakeholders to be involved in consultations:

Such a strategic planning process will have to be informed by consultation with a broad range of stakeholders including, inter alia,


2.3.Consultation process:

It is proposed that the above broad range of stakeholders be organized in more or less three broad groups:


With each of these broadly representative groups a workshop or 'think-tank' will be held in a non-prescriptive manner and a non-threatening atmosphere with professional facilitation services. The groups must be broadly representative of the major stakeholders without being too big. 12-15 people per group are possibly an optimum size.


The programme for the workshop will have to be carefully structured in order to ensure that the objectives are met and that full participation is achieved.


Workshops should preferably be held at both the Southern and Northern campuses. It is recommended that the first workshop should involve the broad community.


In the light of the many operational issues pertaining to the incorporation that require time and attention from managers this year, it is proposed that this consultation process takes place during the first term of 2004.


Timeline for the unfolding of the strategic planning process:

First phase of incorporation (transition phase):

May 2003-December 2003: Pre-incorporation planning phase

January 2004 - December 2006?

Incorporation

UFS academic programme offerings for first year students - transferral of students to Bloemfontein Campus by December 2006

Vista University academic programme offerings for pipeline students - phased out by December 2006


Second
phase of incorporation (reconstitution phase):

January 2004 - December 2004:

Strategic planning phase

January 2004: Identification of key people in stakeholder groupings that will be invited

February 2004: Detailed planning of stakeholder workshops, finalisation of programme, appointment of facilitator(s),

sending out of invitations March 2004: Consultative workshops with stakeholders

April - June 2004: Drawing up of Strategic Plan by UFS Planning Unit

August 2004: Summit with key role-players to discuss proposed plan


ADDENDUM
2

DISCUSSION DOCUMENT


May
2004


STRATEGIC
RECONFIGURATION OF THE BLOEMFONTEIN VISTA CAMPUS

OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE

1.National policies and processes:

In the National Plan on Higher Education (NPHE) (2000) the Minister of Education indicated his intention to restructure the higher education landscape in the country in such a way that the new higher education system produces high quality graduates with the appropriate skills and competencies, as well as the knowledge and research required to contribute to the social and economic development of the country. This was preceded by the Higher Education Act (1997) as amended, which laid out amongst others, mechanisms, processes and procedures through which the new system would be put into place.


The NPHE formed the basis on which the National Working Group (NWG) made recommendations to the Minister. After the cabinet had approved the recommendations of NWG, the Minister on 9 December 2002 made a press statement on the Transformation and Reconstruction of the Higher Education System, finalizing the proposed incorporations and mergers of institutions as strategies to reconfigure the higher education landscape in the country. The incorporation of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus into the University of the Free State became part of these strategies of realizing the four policy goals of the Minister with regard to the reconfiguration of the higher education landscape, which goals should be infused and implemented in tandem with other broader policy goals and objectives, as articulated in Education White Paper 3: A Programme for the Transformation of Higher Education (1997).

These four policy goals are:

Subsequently the Minister set the date of 2 January 2004 for the 'unbundling' of Vista University and the incorporation of Vista Campuses into other higher education institutions.


2.
Reconfiguration process:

The reconfiguration of Vista Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State has been envisaged as a two phase process:


2.1
First phase: Incorporation

The incorporation of Vista University Bloemfontein Campus as proposed in the National Plan for Higher Education and given notice of by the Minister of Education came into effect on 2 January 2004. From that date Vista University ceased to exist and its Bloemfontein Campus will become a campus of the University of the Free State.


As from 2004 no first time entering students were enrolled at the Vista Campus of the UFS, but all first year students enrolled at the main campus as UFS students. Pipeline students are continuing with their Vista academic programmes until these are phased out in two to four years' time. In some programme areas close collaboration between the two campuses has developed and unnecessary duplication of academic offerings is already being limited.


This phasing out of Vista academic programmes and gradual introduction of Vista students into UFS academic programmes constitutes the first phase of incorporation.


2.2
Second phase: Strategic reconfiguration

It is not the intention of the UFS to duplicate its academic programme offerings at another site within close range of its main campus in Bloemfontein in the long term, but rather to reconfigure and develop the Vista Campus into a unique facility for teaching, training and human resource development. The purpose of the reconfiguration of the Vista Campus is to create a new asset for education and training in Bloemfontein and the Free State and in this manner add value and contribute to the development of the region. The strategic reconfiguration of the Vista Campus to satisfy this purpose is therefore the focus of the second phase of the process. This reconfiguration of the facility or site of delivery needs to be preceded and undergirded by a process of strategic planning.


To inform the strategic planning process a series of discussions and consultations are engaged in by the institution with local and regional role- players. The objective of these consultations is to elicit the opinions of a wide range of stakeholders regarding the role of a reconfigured Vista Campus of the University of the Free State in the development of the region and its various communities. In addition, cognizance should be taken of documentation such as the National Human Resource Development Plan and the Free State Development Plan. A gap analysis/needs analysis with regard to education and training needs may also be required to inform the process.


Major parties to be involved in discussions and consultations include primary role-players such as the Free State provincial government (including the Department of Education and the Department of Health), Mangaung local government, other higher education institutions (including the Central University of Technology, Free State, and the new Unisa), and secondary role-players such as other providers of education and training, organized business, organized labour and community-based organizations. Major national role-players that could assist with seed funding for the venture such as the. National Business Initiative (NBI), and Sasol, should also be brought on board.


3.
Guidelines for the strategic reconfiguration of the UFS Vista Campus

The following principles underpin the process of the strategic reconfiguration of the Vista Campus of the UFS within the ambit of the UFS as a single institution with three campuses:

To give effect to these principles, the following guidelines should be taken into account in the reconfiguration of the Vista Campus:

(i) It should be planned within the ambit of the vision, mission, values and strategic priorities of the UFS;

(ii) Planning the reconfiguration should consider all possible options without prejudice, and involve all possible stakeholders;

(iii) Activities at the reconfigured Vista Campus should have human resource development as their primary aim, yet should not duplicate activities at the UFS main campus:

(iv) The physical location and facilities of the Vista Campus are, amongst others, important determining factors for decisions around reconfiguration;

(v) A reconfigured Vista Campus should not only be financially sustainable, but should be self-financing, i.e. it should not be a financial burden on the UFS as a whole:

(vi) Utilization of this facility should contribute to human resource and socio-economic development of the region.


4.
Suggested scope of activities

Within the guidelines above the following are possibilities for future activities at the Vista Campus:

4.1 Bridging and/or foundation certificate programmes

4.2 Extended teacher training programmes, including upgrading of teachers and retraining of teachers

4.3 Joint formal and non-formal academic programmes of higher and further education and training institutions that will afford students opportunities for articulation

4.4A Centre for Adult and Continuing Education to manage and administer short learning programmes (short courses). This will serve the needs of working people and adult learners (SETA funding, learnerships)

4.5A small business research and training unit / Entrepreneurial skills development (SETA funding, learnerships)

4.6The Free State Department of Education Motheo Education Resource Centre

4.7 Management and administrative offices of the Unisa Midlands Branch

4.8 Regional RPL Centre

4.9 Directorate of the Free State Higher Education Consortium.

4.10 Public service training

4.11 Local government training

4.12 Health sector training/ nursing in-service training

4.13 Workforce development centre

4.14 Training of community development workers

4.15...............

4.16………….


5.
Concluding remarks

The challenge for the process of strategic reconfiguration of the Vista Campus of the UFS is to deliver outcomes that would complement and not subtract from what is already being offered in terms of higher education programmes in this region, that would serve new markets and community needs and that would make a substantial contribution to the development of this region. The vision is to develop an integrated community hub for education and training, an 'education and training mall', a facility that would provide meaningful opportunities for lifelong learning. This should contribute to regional economic development and address local and regional challenges of unemployment and poverty. Tackling these problems on a financially sound basis, in a coordinated manner and through a collaborative partnership approach should afford the best possibilities

for success.

FC v N Fourie

25 May 2004


MEMORANDUM FROM THE TASK TEAM OF THE VISTA BLOEMFONTEIN CAMPU&JO THE PARLIAMENTARY PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON HIGHER IDUCATION (CAPE TOWN) SUBJECT: UNRESOLVED ISSUES REGARDING THE INCORPORATION OF VISTA BLOEI~NTEIN CAMPUS INTO THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FREE STATE

The members of the Campus Task Team of the Vista Bloemfontein Campus (hereinafter referred to as VCTT) appointed by the erstwhile Management of the Vista University to manage the incorporation of .the Vista Bloemfontein Campus (VBC) into the University of the Free State (hereinafter referred to as UPS) expresses with grave concern certain unilateral actions taken by the UFS Management in reject of the incorporation of VBC into the UFS, which run contrary to the spirit and letter of the incorporation process as spelt out in the guidelines on incorporation as provided by the Department of Education (DoE). The following are some of the burning issues that the VCTT will like to bring to the attention of the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Higher Education (hereinafter referred to as PCHE) and to seek its intervention for their resolution to the benefit of the staff and students of the VBC, and the entire community of the Free State Province, and the restructuring of higher education in South Africa.


1
Future utilization of the infrastructure of Vista Bloemfontein Campus

Conscious efforts are being made by the Management of UFS to close down the VBC as an access site for higher education, contrary to the Minister of Education's declared intention in the National Plan on Higher Education (NPHE) that no access site will be closed as a result of merger/incorporation programme. Moves have already been initiated by the Management of UFS to let out the offices and lecture halls of VBC to institutions like the University of South Africa and the Free State Higher Education Consortium. The following are some of the possible implications:


1.1 Prospective university students of Bloemfontein community residing in the townships stand to lose out of future higher education opportunities due to high cost of university education. Perhaps an example will suffice: apart from the high university fees charged by UFS, day students will be obliged to spend almost R20.00 daily on transport alone to get to the Main Campus of UFS.


1.2 The job security of staff stands threatened since UFS will be compelled to embark upon a rationalization exercise that may invariably affect mainly the Black staff of the former Vista University Bloemfontein Campus.

1.3 The government's Employment Equity Programme, which appears to have conveniently taken a backstage at the UFS, is unlikely to be achieved.


2
Exclusion of Vista Bloemfontein Campus from management structures

VBC has been excluded from the governance and management structures of the UPS. As a result even decisions that affect staff and students directly are taken without any input from the VBC. Apparently, the neglect of VBC from the governance structures of the UFS is informed by the statutory formulation that "unbundled" Vista University and put Vista campuses under an instrument of incorporation. The following are some of the implications:

2.1 The interpretation by the UFS Management that the process of incorporation of VBC does not require any transformation of the UFS management and governance structures, thereby perpetuating the white domination of these structures.

2.2 The nebulous plan by the UFS Management to turn the VBC into a site for adult learning taken, possibly, as a result of the unwillingness of the white staff to leave their "comfort zones" on the Main Campus to VBC, a campus located at the township, even if it is to the detriment of "increasing access, promoting equity, ensuring institutional diversity", as spelt out in the policy objectives of the reconfiguration process.

2.3 The apparent master-servant relationship existing between the hitherto two separate institutions as manifested, for example, by the following:

2.3.1 Delaying tactics employed by the UFS Management with regard to the alignment of conditions of service resulting in the deprivation of staff of VBC of their annual salary increments scheduled for April 2004.

2.3.2 Refusal by UFS Management to transfer staff from VBC to vacant positions at the Main Campus, insisting that VBC staff apply for such positions.

2.3.3 The undue pressure being put on VBC staff to exercise a choice between belonging to the pension and provident funds of the UFS (VBC staff have until 31 August 2004 to make that choice) though negotiations of VBC staff resorting to cash option of the Vista Provident Fund is still in progress.


3
Invitation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Higher Education

Under the prevailing conditions the VCTT, on behalf of the various structures, respectfully invites the PCHE to urgently visit the VBC to meet with the various structures and stakeholders with the aim of mapping out a strategy that will effectively inform the imperatives of the restructuring and the consolidation of the institutional landscape that is consistent with the non-racial, non-sexist and democratic values as enshrined in the country's Constitution.


4 ANNEXURES

Annexure I (List of the members of the Vista Campus Task Team VCTT)

Annexure 2 (Names and contact details of nominated members of the VCTT)

Cc: The Speaker, Free State Provincial Legislature

Head of the Merger Unit Dept of Higher Education