Voluntary Student Unionism, or VSU, is a principle, particularly in Australia, to have membership fees for students' unions made non-compulsory, as opposed to the current status quo, Universal Student Unionism (USU). Currently, membership of student unions at every university in Australia is voluntary, but students may be required to pay either a compulsory "amenity and services" fee as a condition of enrollment at the university. The university then passes on a portion of that fee to a student organisation to fund and administer student services on campus. Advocates for VSU currently therefore rely on lobbying the state and Commonwealth governments to legislate that membership fees for student organisations cannot be compulsorily collected by universities.
The most vocal proponent of VSU in Australia has been the Australian Liberal Students Federation (the ALSF), and the Liberal Clubs in various universities across Australia which form its membership. Also supportive have been former Liberal Students Tony Abbott, Peter Costello and John Howard, as well as former Federal Minister for Education, David Kemp.
The status quo
Generally, a student, upon enrolling in University, will automatically become a member of their campus student organisation. In order to avoid membership, they must specifically opt out on conscientious grounds. A fee for student services or amenities will be charged to students, typically once a semester or in a lump sum upon enrollment. This fee is generally (although in not all circumstances), collected by the university itself, which takes a portion in collection fees and allocates a portion (typically about half) to university sporting programmes. The remainder is passed on to the campus student organisation(s).
Student organisations are primarily reliant on these levies to fund their activities, although some large organisations gain a degree of income from businesses such as refectories and eateries. Student organisations may also operate businesses such as legal, employment and health assistance programmes, child care, bookshops and other retailers, but these are reliant on subsidy by the student organisation and will not in all instances make a profit.
Funding for student organisations is contingent on their having democratic constitutions and being financially accountable.
Student organisations across Australia take a multiplicity of different forms; some campuses may have multiple, separate organisations, and others may have a single, unified student union. The two central roles of student organisations, service provision and student representation, may be performed by separate organisations or the same unified structure.
The argument for VSU relies on the idea that not all students make use of the services provided by student organisations, or make use of them equally (see user-pays ). It is also argued that the representation provided by student organisations is of poor quality and does not reflect the opinions of actual students.
Analysis of VSU
There are three main arguments advanced in favour of Voluntary Student Unionism by its proponents. Firstly, it is argued that requiring compulsory membership of student organisations is contrary to the principle of freedom of association, as found in Australia's common law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and other international treaties. Some go so far as to compare compulsory membership fees to extortion.
Secondly, it is argued that compulsory funding of campus services diminishes or removes the opportunity to provide more desirable services. Proponents of this argument argue that the brief experience of VSU in Western Australia demonstrates that student organisations will realign their priorities and emphasise commercial activities and student welfare & adocacy when they no longer receive a compulsory fee. Compulsory services funding encourages inefficient service provision and reduce competition, ultimately disadvantaging student consumers.
Thirdly, following the realignment of priorities which VSU is likely to entail, it is believed by some that political activities, particularly off-campus activities, will be severely or even completely curtailed. Those supporting VSU argue that student organisations are unrepresentative of students' views, and do not have the right to levy funding for political campaigns and activities from students who may not support them. Since historically Australia's student organisations have been dominated either by leftist student bodies, or student political groups affiliated with the Australian Labor Party, the introduction of VSU is likely to politically disadvantage these groups by removing the advantages of encumbency. This would also presumably work to the advantage of their right-wing political opponents. Some anti-VSU advocates claim that this is the ALSF's primary motivation in championing VSU.
Australian universities generally have been in support of universal membership and compulsory fees for student organisations for three broad reasons. Firstly, they prefer to leave service provision in the hands of students; secondly, the activities associated with campus organisations are an attractive feature to students, and thirdly, they view student political bodies as valid representative bodies.
VSU would require universities themselves to take on many of the costly roles currently performed by student organisations. Universities prefer to leave service provision to student organisations, so that they are saved the financial and other burdens associated with the role.
Universities typically consider student organisations and their activities, particular those based around campus clubs and societies, sports associations and similar "cultural" activities to be a part of the "university experience". Many universities rely on this as a part of their marketing to attract international students and domestic full-fee paying students. This is particularly the case for international student support services, as international students are a large source of income for universities and are by far the largest single group that make use of student support services.
The Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee (AVCC), the representative body for university administrations, also views student organisations as having a legitimate representation role, even though much of student advocacy is directly against university administrations. University administrators prefer to have an external body that students can bring greviances to, rather than having to deal directly with every disgruntled student, or with a variety of different student lobby groups. The AVCC and all major universities have publicly condemned the proposed VSU legislation.
Voluntary student unionism would also have an impact on Australia's elite sports, with the Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) expressing disatisfaction with the legisation, arguing that it would negatively influence the future success of Australia's olympic medal chances. One third of Australia's Olympic Team were university graduates or students, and benefited from the $30 million in funding collected from compulsory fees. The AOC worries that without funding from student organisation fees, many athletes would never have been able to compete.
Australian universities' competative edge on the international student market will also be greatly diminished under voluntary student unionism, putting at risk a $6 billion industry. Without student services, it is believed that fewer international students, who all pay full, up-front fees, would enroll at Australian universities. Alternatively, the Howard Government has stated that the Education Services for Overseas Students Act will still allow compulsory fees to be charged to international students to pay for student amenities and services.
The push for VSU has been strongly resisted by the Australian National Union of Students and trade unions. NUS views the argument that not all students benefit from student membership as fallacious, claiming that there is an indirect benefit for students generally. It views pro-VSU positions as being analogous to voluntary taxation; particularly given that, if membership was voluntary, there would be opportunities for students to enjoy student organisation services without having to pay for them. The argument runs that student services would still be demanded under VSU, and the charges for them would still have to be levied by universities; but students would lose oversight of the allocation and direction of those funds (the principal of "student control of student affairs"). In recognition of this, the Howard Government's proposed legislation includes provision fining universities for not refunding student services charges.
Trade unions oppose VSU on the basis that it would lead to huge job losses, particularly in regional areas that may rely on student organisation employees for the local economy.
In advocating VSU, its opponents claim, the ALSF is only attempting to silence criticism of the Howard Government's policy towards students. Being fully aware that student organisations are mainly reliant on compulsory fees, the ALSF, according to this view, is knowingly seeking the destruction of student organisations. The Labor Party and the Australian Council of Trade Unions alleges that the implementation of VSU by the Howard Government represents an ideological hostility towards collective organisations.
History of VSU
Compulsory student organisation membership was initially accepted as uncontentious by all political persuasions. By the 1970's, the overtly political nature of the Australian Union of Students , which ran a number of left-wing campaigns (for example in support of the Palestinian Liberation Organisation), led a significant minority within that organisation to call for voluntary student organisation membership.
VSU advocates initially attempted to bring it about by running campus referendum campaigns calling for voluntary membership. Such campaigns, however, were consistently defeated. Nevertheless, a campaign was successfully run to have many student organisations disaffiliate themselves from AUS, causing its eventual collapse.
NUS was formed as the AUS's successor in the late 1980's. The ALSF then changed to focusing on lobbing state and federal Liberal Party governments to abolish compulsory membership. A case concerning James Cook University was brought to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, claiming that compulsory union membership was anti-competitive. The Commission eventually rejected the case on the basis that student organisations had a positive social impact. In Western Australia, VSU was partially enacted by the state Liberal Party government, only to be rescinded when the ALP regained power.
Moves to introduce VSU federally have previously been persistently stalled in the Australian Senate, where the Labor Party, the Australian Democrats and the Greens have voted against the principle. VSU advocates received a boost, however, when in the aftermath of the 2004 legislative elections, the Howard goverment gained effective control of the Senate. Nationwide implementation of VSU has been listed among the government's legislative agenda to be placed before the Senate.
On the 16th of March, 2005, Brendan Nelson introduced the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front Student Union Fees) Bill 2005 before the Parliament. The bill is widely expected to be passed once the Government gains control of the Senate in July. The proposed law includes provisions that financially penalised universities that did not immediately refund student services charges levied on students. The plan attracted negative reactions from NUS, the Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee and the Australian Labor Party. The Liberal-National Coalition is also split over this issue, with the National Party arguing that VSU would hurt regional Australia. They favour compulsory fees for student services and amenities. The current proposed legislation would abolish universal student unionism from 1 January, 2006.
External links
News articles
Pro-VSU pages
