The current impasse between the government and the University lecturers was an accident waiting to happen ever since the government announced it had reached an agreement – and later signed it – with the Medical Association of Malta last year.

In November, the government and MAM concluded a deal that brought about a marked improvement in the public service doctors’ working conditions, which included a hefty rise in their salaries.

Through the agreement, consultants were able to choose to forfeit their private practice against a e34,940 pay rise by 2010 to e65,222, while doctors who kept their private practice are able to earn up to a maximum of e56,308 in 2011.

As soon as the announcement had been made, the Malta Union of Teachers made it clear that it wanted a similar deal with the government for professionals under its wing. It argued that doctors should not get preferential treatment. University lecturers were, after all, responsible for educating the generations that will lead Malta in the future, the union said.

And so now we have come to a situation where the government and the MUT, together with the University of Malta Academic Staff Association, are locked in a dispute over the new collective agreement.

Negotiations have been going on for quite a while, but the two sides seem to be quite at a distance from each other. This even led the two unions to order a boycott of the official opening ceremony of the academic year, held on Tuesday, and call a one-day strike for the following day. The unions have not excluded another dose of industrial action if the talks do not lead to a solution.

The government is saying that the lecturers are being greedy, while the unions insist that the government is being stingy with them, whereas it was openhanded with the doctors. Pay packages that have been published by the government and the unions do not tally, with the government going on the high side to sustain its argument while the unions went on the low side to convince one and all that the lecturers are not asking for that much.

This tit-for-tat in the media does not help bring the two sides closer. The union has every intention to put forward its claims and let the people know why it has resorted to such drastic moves, while the government seems to be more cautious on the issue, perhaps preferring to speak of its intentions behind closed doors.

Yet, the two parties must sit down together and find a solution to the issue, the quicker the better. It must be said that the union has, so far, been responsible in its action. Its boycotting of the opening ceremony was more of a symbolic albeit strong gesture, while the one-day strike action was held on the first day of the academic year, which on the whole did not disrupt the university’s functions that much.

On the other hand, the union has already said that it is ready to order more industrial action if no deal is reached. While saying that unions have every right to protect the interests of their members, at the same time more responsibility is urged so as to affect the progress of students under the lecturers’ care as minimally as possible.

This is another reason why an agreement should be concluded quickly. We are in no doubt about the professionalism of the university lecturers, but such uncertainties are bound to have an impact.

Students should not find themselves embroiled in an unfortunate situation that does not concern them directly. Their future is at stake.