USPSU rebutt Konai Thaman's 'misplaced vitriolic' letter to USP Council: Thaman has left USP but remains in contact with many. Is HER attack on Ahluwalia linked to her missing out being appointed Emeritus Professor?

"In the case of Konai, she has received nine post retirement contracts without meeting the threshold of the performance expected of a professor" - Professor Pal Ahluwalia

"In this same year he [Professor Pal Ahluwalia] pulled a $27m excess despite Fiji Governments failure to meet its obligations and delayed conditional contributions by donor governments."
USPSU Letter to Council, 15 February 2021

"The first three paragraphs of her letter provide commentaries on the 65-year retirement policy of the University, and how she has been treated under this policy since her retirement in 2011. She also points to her 46 years of mostly fulfilling employment at the university and her rise from assistant lecturer to professor as well as Pro-VC. Her experience of post-retirement treatment by USP because of USP's retirement Policy was instituted by Rajesh Chandra and she is not alone. NONE of this has anything whatsoever to do with Professor Pal Ahluwalia who has opined that the policy is ridiculous. Her experience of post-retirement treatment by USP because of USP's retirement Policy was instituted by Rajesh Chandra and she is not alone."

15 February 2021
 
Dear Council Members,
 
Re:  Professor Konai Thaman’s (DOB 6/02/1946) Letter dated 11/2/2021 addressed to Council members; entitled Personal Reflections
 
Professor Konai Thaman and her letter to Council is being quoted in the media. In defense the Staff Unions believe it warrants a response.  
 
The following constitutes a response to Professor Konai Thaman’s letter:

1. Professor Pal Ahluwalia has just completed two (2) years of service and not three, having officially commenced as VCP in January 2019 making her statement of period of expectation of change, factually incorrect.
2. Unfortunately, Professor Thaman’s views and judgement about VC Pal lack specific evidence and instances. For example, who among the supporters of good governance have received special treatment? Has this been verified against USP Policy? How many and who have left because they are unhappy with USP. Could the reality be the attraction of a salary one and a half times higher than USP – what really is the reason?
3. The first three paragraphs of her letter provide commentaries on the 65-year retirement policy of the University, and how she has been treated under this policy since her retirement in 2011. She also points to her 46 years of mostly fulfilling employment at the university and her rise from assistant lecturer to professor as well as Pro-VC. Her experience of post-retirement treatment by USP because of USP's retirement Policy was instituted by Rajesh Chandra and she is not alone. NONE of this has anything whatsoever to do with Professor Pal Ahluwalia who has opined that the policy is ridiculous. Her experience of post-retirement treatment by USP because of USP's retirement Policy was instituted by Rajesh Chandra and she is not alone.
4. Likewise Professor Thaman’s `ten not so good years post-retirement’ were under Rajesh Chandra’s leadership and whose legacy of issues VC Pal has spent a great deal of energy in his 25 months trying to rectify. Is it fair that she attributes her ten years of discontent to VC Pal.
5. Professor Thaman’s defense of her friend Professor Derek Armstrong is understandable but to regard him as the 'sacrificial lamb' is way off the mark. Is he not in the famous BDO Report?
6. It was then I decided to keep an eye on the guy who always seemed to say he would do something and never seemed to do anything. Two other Professors who were not called by VC Pal picked up the phone to start the conversation which continued! What prevented Professor Thaman from doing the same if her interests were truly that of the USP?  
7. What particular policy changes are being referred to? To give credence to these, specifics are needed or they remain `as pie in the sky’. The restructure of the University was based on a paper discussed at various levels including Senate and Council. Taking into account the COVID-19 situation and the financial implications added to by Fiji Government’s conditions for payment of its dues, the VC proposed a solution and consulted widely in a short period of time, under great pressure.  In this same year he pulled a $27m excess despite Fiji Governments failure to meet its obligations and delayed conditional contributions by donor governments.
8. In referring to VC Pal as ex-VCP, this is interpreted by many as giving tacit support to his removal which is in total disregard of workers and human rights and the Council's contractual obligations.  The Unions will never condone such actions and expect their regional academics especially, to be of similar mind.
9. Her anguish and pining for a true Pasefikan to take on the USP raises questions. Who then was the man from Maro, Rajesh Chandra? Was he not a Pacific Islander as defined by in Fiji law?
10. The issues of the former regime were well known and the treatment of her spouse Professor Randolph Thaman by Rajesh Chandra and Anjeela Jokhan was nothing short of disgusting but not an issue raised in open University fora.
11. She accuses VCP of lack of consultation. This VCP has consulted and met with staff on [Academic and Professional staff; I&J now Admin staff and Individual sections] on many issues – staffing issues/concerns; COVID; USP funding; The Re-organisation of USP etc.
12. Professor Thaman has left the University but continues to maintain contacts with many. Could this response be a consequence of Professor Thaman not being made an Emeritus Professor on her departure? Some think there is a link.
13. Professor Thaman’s commentary about spiritualism is sad and mean. Spiritualism is not simply about praying. It is putting that prayer into action which many, both staff and students believe VC Pal has tried to do which is very much resembles our Pacific beliefs. The humility shown by VC Pal in his outreach to students and staff at all levels has added to the breath of fresh air that many believe he is.

It is regrettable and sad to read the letter written by Professor Thaman which instead of being reflections regarding her mostly positive experience of 46 years of employment at the regional University, is made up of misplaced vitriolic assertions against VCP Professor Pal Ahluwalia who has been summarily deported without opportunity to respond to the warrant and above all without the knowledge of his employer, the USP Council.