UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE staff are pushing for a four-day working week for professional staff, a 20% pay rise and new safeguards against artificial intelligence under claims lodged with management.

The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) served its log of claims on the university on Thursday, opening negotiations for a new enterprise agreement. 

The claims also include enforceable workload protections for academics.

The four-day week -- sought for professional staff without any reduction in pay -- is a key part of the union's push, alongside a demand to strip management of its unilateral power to set academic workloads.

Under the union’s proposal, Academic Workload Committees would be established across the university with majority membership drawn from non-management academic staff and binding authority over workload decisions.

The university would also be required to protect staff against adverse effects of artificial intelligence systems -- reflecting growing concern about how the technology is being deployed in higher education workplaces.

An above-inflation pay increase responds to ongoing cost-of-living pressures.

NTEU University of Melbourne branch president David Gonzalez said staff had reached a breaking point on workloads.

"The evidence on four-day weeks is remarkably consistent -- productivity holds, absenteeism drops and staff retention improves," he said. "The University of Melbourne prides itself on being evidence-led. It's time to apply that to its own working conditions.

"When workloads are set without staff input, the result is burnout, which hurts academics' ability to deliver world-class teaching and education.

"With the pace of AI's development, it's essential we have serious guardrails embedded in the agreement that protect us from harm.

"You can't keep asking staff to do more with less and then offer them a pay rise that doesn't even keep up with the cost of living.

“Staff have done the work to develop serious proposals. Now it’s time for management to engage constructively on a plan to make the university work better for staff, students and the community."

ends

THE Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit has tabled the independent post-election review of the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO).

Commissioned by the committee following the 2025 Federal Election and conducted by Dr Martin Parkinson AC PSM, the Review examined the effectiveness and efficiency of the PBO, the appropriateness of its mandate, its resourcing and service demand levels, stakeholder feedback, and the impact of its work on public debates.

Committee Chair, Josh Burns MP, said, "The review makes it clear that 13 years after it was established, the PBO continues to be a highly regarded institution in the public policy landscape, and its work is considered to be insightful and highly credible."

The review found that the PBO’s mandate continues to be appropriate and should remain unchanged, and that altering it could jeopardise the PBO’s established credibility and strong working relationships. It also identified opportunities to further strengthen engagement with parliamentarians, parliamentary parties, and the broader public.

A total of 23 recommendations were made across themes including enhancing credibility, improving transparency, strengthening the PBO’s service offering, and maximising its long‑term impact. Together, the recommendations are intended to facilitate more efficient support to parliamentarians and to strengthen the PBO’s ability to continue delivering high quality, credible support on all dimensions of its mandate going forward.

The committee will further consider the findings and recommendations as part of its ongoing oversight of the PBO. The committee also extended its appreciation to Dr Parkinson and the PBO Review secretariat for their work.

The review is available on the committee’s website.

ends

THE Joint Committee of Public Accounts and Audit has released its report on its inquiry into Sport Integrity Australia’s (SIA) management of Australia’s National Anti-Doping Scheme. The inquiry reviewed and further examined issues raised in Auditor-General Report No. 27 of 2024-25.

Chair of the Committee, Josh Burns MP, said, "SIA plays a critical role in safeguarding the integrity of Australian sport. As a regulator of the National Anti-Doping Scheme, SIA must operate with effective governance and management arrangements, a risk-based regulatory approach, and effective safeguards against regulatory capture.

"Evidence presented to the inquiry aligned with the audit findings, and the Committee identified several concerns with SIA’s regulatory practices," Mr Burns said. "In particular, SIA’s approach for sports that fund their own anti-doping testing was not consistently risk-based. The committee was also not satisfied that SIA has adequate controls to mitigate regulatory capture risks or ensure consistency in its regulatory activities.

"When a regulator’s performance of its legislated responsibilities is found to only be partly effective, it undermines confidence in its work — both for the Parliament and among the public."

The committee made three recommendations to address some of its concerns:

• that SIA develop effectiveness and efficiency performance measures for anti-doping testing and investigations as required by the Commonwealth Performance Framework;
• that SIA establish a formal policy on the acceptance of gifts and benefits, with the policy to be actively communicated to all regulated individuals and entities and be published on SIA’s website;
• that SIA establish a template for athlete lists provided by regulated entities that includes documented risk factors, and information provided in this format should be made a requirement.

The report is available for download on the inquiry website.

ends

THE Joint Standing Committee on Implementation of the National Redress Scheme will hold a public hearing in Canberra on Friday, March 13, for its inquiry into the continuing operation of the Scheme.

Committee Chair, Jodie Belyea MP, said the committee is grateful for the contributions made in support of the inquiry to date.

"The National Redress Scheme plays a central role in Australia’s response to institutional child sexual abuse," Ms Belyea said. "It is an important program for a significant number of people.

"The committee has received a substantial number of submissions in support of our current inquiry, and public hearings over the coming months will allow us to explore some of the issues raised in these contributions."

Ms Belyea said the hearing would enable the committee to gather evidence from a range of key stakeholders.

‘The committee will hear from the Department of Social Services, as well as Redress Support Services and legal stakeholders. This evidence will help the Committee consider key issues as the Scheme enters its final operational stage."

The committee will schedule further public hearings soon and will hear evidence from a wide range of stakeholders and individuals as it examines issues related to the effective, safe and equitable management of the scheme.

More information about the inquiry, including the terms of reference and submissions, can be found on the inquiry webpage.

Public hearing details

Date: Friday, 13 March 2026
Time: 9:15am – 1:45pm (AEDT)
Location: Committee Room 1R4, Parliament House, Canberra and via videoconference

A program for the public hearing is available on the inquiry webpage.

Public hearings are broadcast live on the Australian Parliament House Streaming Portal.

ends