Allegations that some Unisa staff members, including academics, were seconded or appointed to acting posts irregularly is contained in a draft report dated April 12.
A probe by a private company commissioned by former Unisa vice-chancellor Prof Mandla Makhanya last year also found that some staff members were appointed to act in senior posts despite not having the required qualifications or not being interviewed for the positions.
According to a 68-page draft report, which was addressed to chief audit executive Xola Lingani, allegations of irregular secondments or acting appointments involving 18 staff members were made through an anonymous tip-off e-mail address.
The company, which was tasked with finding out whether the identified officials possessed the requisite qualifications and whether they received “undue benefit”, scrutinised the appointments of 14 staff members.
Unisa, the largest open-distance learning institution in Africa, enrols nearly a third of all SA students.
Some of the findings included:
- a professor being elevated to the position of acting director of an entity in one of the colleges without having the necessary qualifications;
- a staff member being appointed to a newly created senior post within one of the colleges despite not having a doctoral degree;
- a staff member being seconded to a manager’s post without it being advertised and remaining on secondment in that post for two years and seven months, in violation of a policy that states that the maximum period should not exceed a year;
- a staff member seconded as acting manager despite not having a postgraduate qualification and his line manager failing to remove him from the post after discovering he did not have the required qualification; and
- an academic appointed to act in an executive position for more than 12 months in contravention of policy.
The preliminary report stated that the academic’s acting post was also not rotated, which was in violation of policy that reads: “Line management should also, where viable, consider rotation in the acting position so as not to create expectations of permanent appointment and to provide relevant qualifying employees with an equal opportunity to act.”
The report also received an allegation that a professor was seconded to a unit in one of the colleges though he was a “failed” manager with no experience.
It stated there was no evidence showing he was interviewed for the post.
“The application form was not signed by the recommending executive dean, and there were no minutes of the relevant mancom [management committee] approving the appointment.”
The report recommended that Unisa should consider hiring a law firm to advise the university on possible actions to be taken against those implicated.
“In view of the irregular appointments of employees to secondment or acting roles, the university should consider reversing the allowances that are currently paid to the implicated employees.”
Another recommendation was that Unisa consider reviewing the policies on secondments and acting roles “to make it possible for HR [human resources] advisers to enforce the policies”.
Unisa spokesperson Victor Dlamini said it was necessary for the university to study any investigation report thoroughly to ensure that whatever action taken is done responsibly and in a manner that will ensure the rights of all affected parties are not violated.
“This report is not an exception to the rule.”
He said part of studying such investigative reports involved ascertaining whether the probes themselves were properly authorised by the university and conducted fairly, legally and without malice or prejudice.
“This is even more important where the investigations and the resultant reports are contested.”
Said Dlamini: “We must also caution against any uncontrollable urge to base any decision on draft reports which have not yet been accepted and or signed off as final positions of the university.”
“This will be grossly unfair and prejudicial to the individuals alleged to have committed whatever misconduct is being investigated.”
He said the university also frowned upon the leaking of confidential university information or documents to the media and the public.
“Staff members have been repeatedly advised to refrain from such action, which is a serious misconduct.”
Dlamini said the university would not hesitate to take appropriate action against any staff member found to have committed such misconduct.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.