Control and Insecurity in Australian and Canadian Universities during the COVID-19 Pandemic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how the COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing university management control strategies have influenced higher education workers’ job security, stress and happiness. The primary quantitative and qualitative data are drawn from a survey of fourteen universities across Australia and Canada, supplemented by secondary research. The analysis examines institutional and worker responses to the pandemic, and resulting conflict over financial control at the macro (sector), meso (university) and micro (individual) levels. At the macro level, university responses were shaped by public policy decisions at both national and subnational layers of the state, and the higher education sector in both countries had a distinctly neoliberal form. However, Australian universities were exposed to greater financial pressure to cut job positions, and Australian university management might have been more inclined to do so than Canadian universities overall. Different institutional support for unionism at the macro level influenced how university staff were affected at the meso and micro levels. Restructuring at the universities across both countries negatively impacted job security and career prospects, in turn leading to reduced job satisfaction and increased stress. Although working from home was novel and liberating for many professional staff, it was a negative experience for many academic staff. Our analysis demonstrates that the experiences of university staff were influenced by more than the work arrangements implemented by universities during the COVID-19 pandemic. The approaches of universities to job protection, restructuring and engagement with staff through unions appeared to influence staff satisfaction, stress and happiness. Our findings extend the literature that documents how university staff routinely challenge neoliberalization processes in a variety of individual and collective actions, particularly in times of crisis. We argue that theorization of struggles over control of labour should be extended to account for struggles over control of finance. Abstract We studied 14 universities across Canada and Australia to examine how the COVID-19 crisis, mediated through management strategies and conflict over financial control in higher education, influenced workers’ job security and affective outcomes like stress and happiness. The countries differed in their institutional frameworks, their union density, their embeddedness in neoliberalism and their negotiation patterns. Management strategies also differed between universities. Employee outcomes were influenced by differences in union involvement. Labour cost reductions negotiated with unions could improve financial outcomes, but, even in a crisis, management might not be willing to forego absolute control over finance, and it was not the depth of the crisis that shaped management decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".