Massey chancellor’s views off the mark
Perhaps the greatest embarrassment for Massey University in the debacle involving its now-former chancellor degrading the value of female vets, is that the man atop an institution that values research and evidence above all else would fail to base his opinions on fact.
Chancellor Chris Kelly was clearly shooting from the hip when he told a rural publication that female vet graduates were only worth ‘‘two fifths’’ of a full time equivalent because of the fallout rate caused by their decision to have a family.
Kelly, a vastly experienced businessman, was forced to fall on his sword this week after intense public backlash to his comments.
Regardless of his personal opinions on the topic of gender diversity in the workplace, Kelly has obviously failed to recognise its significance as a political hot potato.
His dilemma was compounded by Massey having a proud status as an organisation that employs and produces a huge number of talented female academics, many of whom expressed indignation at the inference they did not stack up to their male counterparts.
The Rural News article that landed Kelly in hot water was focused on changes to the practical work at Massey’s vet courses.
It mentioned an apparent refocus on the practical aspects of the course, done in an effort to achieve a ‘‘better’’ male/female balance of graduating vets.
While Kelly admits it is ‘‘fine’’ to have the vet classes dominated by females - women make up 75 per cent of classes - it was unwise of him to describe women vets leaving to have children as a ’’problem’’.
The real problem here are his views, which simply do not correlate with the facts nor the realities of the industry. While there is demand for more vets, moves have already been made by Massey and the Government to increase class sizes.
Male and female vets work the same hours up until the age of 30, though there is a differential across all ages, with men on average working about 8 hours more a week.
Kelly’s ‘‘two fifths’’ call was off the mark in mathematical terms but, irregardless, the figures are hardly a damning indictment of the impact women’s life choices have on the vet trade.
Kelly’s comments may have been made with a genuine concern for the future of the vet industry, but the delivery and context in which they were presented were a big misstep in an otherwise successful career.