Makerere University staff members have united in opposition to the iron-fisted directives of Vice Chancellor Prof. Barnabas Nawangwe, specifically regarding the implementation of a contentious clock-in system.
The formidable coalition of Makerere University Academic Association, Makerere University Administrative Staff Association (MUASA), and National Union of Education Institutions (NUEI) have unequivocally expressed their discontent in a meticulously crafted response to Nawangwe’s memorandum, which was leaked to the public at the close of the previous month.
MUASA, spearheading the revolt, vehemently rejected the adoption of the Biometric Attendance Management System, citing alternative, more efficacious methods for assessing academic staff performance and productivity.
The staff’s primary grievance lies in what they perceive as a glaring lack of meaningful consultation and stakeholder involvement before the introduction of this biometric system.
The staff assert that this unilateral move could perilously jeopardize their ability to uphold the university’s cherished mission.
Nawangwe, in his missive, highlighted instances of perceived insubordination among a fraction of the staff, manifested in a disregard for established schedules and the audacious crafting of individual timetables, with scant consideration for student convenience.
He also divulged unsettling reports of some staff members purportedly dividing their commitments between Makerere and other educational institutions or organizations where discipline is stringently enforced.
“Failure by some colleagues to teach the full curriculum, one even reported to have set an examination for the whole syllabus after delivering only one lecture out of the expected fifteen, which the students rightly rejected,” Nawangwe stated.
The VC contended that these malpractices are not unique to Makerere but are a global phenomenon in universities. He argued that biometric access systems are standard across the academic world, positioning Makerere as one of the few leading international institutions yet to embrace this prevailing practice.
Undeterred by Nawangwe’s stern admonition, the resolute staff associations issued a unified response, underscoring their belief that electronic access systems, enabling flexible work hours, are employed globally, in stark contrast to the rigid 8:00 am to 5:00 pm clock-in regimen being proposed.
“If this is what you meant, then it’s a bad copy and paste,” scoffed a segment of the staff’s dissenting missive. They maintained that their research pursuits, both within the confines of the office and in the broader community, require a level of autonomy that would be severely hampered by the mandated 8:00 am to 5:00 pm presence.
In a poignant rejoinder, the staff raised valid concerns regarding the practicality of Nawangwe’s earlier entreaty to elevate publication rates and transform Makerere into a research-centric institution, given the constraints imposed by the proposed biometric system.
As this battle of wills escalates, the halls of Makerere University resonate with fervent discussions, resolute protests, and impassioned debates.
The outcome of this clash of ideals remains uncertain, but one thing is clear: the staff’s defiance has laid down a gauntlet, challenging the established norms and demanding that their voices be heard.
