Leadership or lack thereof:
Professor Armstrong wrote to Professor Ahluwalia:
“Although I was not invited to attend the Faculty consultations on the University restructure, I did join the sessions by zoom and was surprised and disturbed by derogatory comments that you made about me personally and about my leadership of the research and international areas.
“Given that your statements were public statements I am responding in exactly the same way by copying members of SMT, the University Research Committee and members of the Professoriate, all of whom have a key role in respect of research and international issues at the University.
“You stated that one member of SMT had refused to take a 5% pay-cut. Although you did not name me, it has been widely repeated on social media that this person is myself. Let me make my position very clear.
“If the crisis that the University now faces had been brought on by Covid-19 or any other crisis that was beyond our power to control I would have willingly taken a 5% or much larger cut in salary.
“I have consistently argued that senior staff should bear the brunt of any financial damage that might arise from the Covid crisis. However, it is very clear that the crisis in the University’s finances is not Covid related.
“The impact of Covid has been marginal compared to the significant deferral of funding that followed first, from your own attacks on the integrity of University governance, and latterly, as a direct result of the numerous allegations of wrongdoing that have been made against you that have still not been satisfactorily investigated or resolved. (apart from two which have been validated by an “independent” Ernst and Young investigation).
“I made it clear at the time when SMT was asked to take a pay cut and I make it clear once again in this letter, that I do not believe any member of staff should be asked to take a pay-cut or a reduction in their benefits when the financial crisis faced by the University is based primarily on the single issue of your leadership of the University.
“The loss of donor funding has nothing to do with Covid-19, it is the direct consequence of a litany of “questionable” decisions and actions that you have taken. Indeed, unsurprisingly, the Fiji government believes it has a fiduciary and ethical obligation to the “tax paying” citizens of Fiji to protect the investment of the people of Fiji until it is clear that their funds are not being squandered.
“Simply put—this crisis will not be resolved, and no staff member will be relieved of the stressful burden of looming pay cuts, and possible job losses until there is a full and “independent” investigation of the numerous charges (from a variety of staff members from all levels of the University) levied against you.” He ends his letter by saying: “As the leader of this institution, I would expect greater honesty from you in the reporting of these facts.
“Your decision to demean me and falsely represent the quality of my performance in my central portfolios reflects poorly on your leadership because, in spite of the challenges, USP continues to perform admirably in the research and international areas.
“Those are the praises that you should be singing rather than administering personal attacks, which are then echoed in far more derogatory ways by your supporters in the abusive, slanderous and threatening social media posts that I have come to expect.”