Deakin University has withdrawn a sweeping proposal for organisational changes that would have placed hundreds of professional staff positions at risk, following strong opposition from employees, students and the National Tertiary Education Union. The decision, announced on 18 June 2026, ends a fortnight of uncertainty that began with the 4 June release of plans for a Major Workplace Change affecting student support services and infrastructure operations.

Proposed Changes and Their Scope

The university outlined two main areas of proposed reform. One focused on consolidating student-facing support roles to align with the Education and Employability Guiding Plan 2026-2030. The other addressed infrastructure and digital services. Under the original framework, existing positions would have been abolished in a spill-and-fill process, requiring affected staff to reapply for redesigned roles. Estimates indicated that up to 105 professional staff positions could have been made redundant, with broader impacts potentially touching 535 or more employees through reapplication requirements. University leadership described the intent as improving efficiency and student outcomes, yet the scale prompted widespread concern about service continuity and staff workloads.

Immediate Staff and Community Reaction

News of the proposal spread rapidly across Deakin’s multiple campuses in Victoria. Professional staff in student advisory, library and administrative functions expressed alarm that critical support networks could be disrupted. Students voiced fears that reduced staffing would affect enrolment processes, academic advising and wellbeing services. Social media discussions and campus meetings highlighted the human cost of the changes, with many describing the reapplication process as destabilising. The National Tertiary Education Union quickly mobilised, arguing that the plans lacked a clear business case and risked undermining the very student experience the university sought to enhance.

Leadership Transition Amid the Controversy

Vice-Chancellor Iain Martin, who had led the institution since 2019, resigned shortly after the proposal surfaced. His departure left the university under caretaker leadership, with Matthew Clarke serving as interim vice-chancellor and Chancellor Claire Higgins providing oversight. The timing of the resignation intensified scrutiny, as staff questioned whether the restructure plans had contributed to the leadership change. University communications emphasised continuity, yet the combination of job uncertainty and executive transition created a period of heightened anxiety across the 6,000-strong workforce.

Union Pressure and Constructive Dialogue

The National Tertiary Education Union played a central role in reversing the plans. Branch representatives engaged directly with university leadership, presenting detailed concerns about the proposal’s impact on service delivery and staff wellbeing. Union communications highlighted that more than 140 positions stood to be saved through sustained advocacy. Following the withdrawal, the union described the outcome as the result of strongly constructive discussions and reiterated its commitment to genuine consultation on any future changes. This episode underscores the influence of collective bargaining in Australian higher education, where enterprise agreements require formal consultation before major workplace alterations proceed.

Photo by Deakin University on Unsplash

Official Reversal and Apology

In a joint email to staff on 18 June, Chancellor Claire Higgins and caretaker Vice-Chancellor Matthew Clarke confirmed that the Major Workplace Change would not proceed. The message stated that roles would continue unchanged and apologised for the unsettling period. Emphasis shifted to stability and the core mission of teaching and research. The original consultation period, scheduled to conclude on 19 June, was effectively terminated. University statements noted that no decisions had been finalised prior to the reversal, framing the withdrawal as a responsive adjustment to feedback received during the brief consultation window.

Broader Context in Australian Higher Education

Deakin’s experience reflects ongoing financial and operational pressures facing many Australian universities. Declining international student revenue in recent years, combined with rising operational costs, has prompted several institutions to examine staffing structures. However, the rapid reversal at Deakin illustrates the limits of top-down change when staff and union resistance is organised and vocal. Comparable episodes at other universities have shown that transparent consultation and clear evidence of benefit are essential for maintaining morale and institutional reputation. The episode also highlights the role of regulatory expectations under the Higher Education Standards Framework, which requires universities to demonstrate effective governance and student support mechanisms.

Implications for Staff Wellbeing and Retention

The fortnight of uncertainty took a measurable toll on staff. Reports of heightened stress, reduced productivity and concerns about future job security emerged across faculties and divisions. Professional staff, who often provide the day-to-day backbone of student services, felt particularly exposed. The reversal offers immediate relief, yet rebuilding trust will require sustained attention to workload, career pathways and recognition of contributions. Human resources teams at Deakin are expected to prioritise stability measures, including clear communication channels and support for professional development, in the coming months.

Impact on Students and Service Delivery

Student-facing services stood to be most directly affected by the proposed changes. Academic advisors, student success teams and digital support staff play vital roles in retention and completion rates. Any reduction in these areas risks longer wait times, fragmented support and diminished student satisfaction. The decision to maintain current structures ensures continuity for the thousands of domestic and international students enrolled at Deakin’s Geelong, Melbourne, Warrnambool and online campuses. University leadership has pledged to explore efficiency improvements through collaborative rather than reductive means.

Future Outlook and Governance Lessons

With the restructure abandoned, attention turns to Deakin’s long-term strategy. The Education and Employability Guiding Plan 2026-2030 remains in place, but implementation approaches will likely evolve to incorporate broader stakeholder input. Governance reviews may examine how the original proposal reached the consultation stage without wider council awareness, as some reports suggested the process blindsided certain members. Strengthened internal communication protocols and earlier engagement with the National Tertiary Education Union could prevent similar flashpoints. The episode serves as a case study for other institutions navigating change in a sector where staff expertise and union representation remain influential.

Photo by Deakin University on Unsplash

Opportunities for Positive Reform

While the immediate threat has passed, Deakin retains scope for measured improvements in service design. Collaborative working groups involving academic and professional staff could identify efficiencies without compulsory redundancies. Investment in digital tools that complement rather than replace human support offers one avenue. The university’s strong performance in graduate employability rankings provides a foundation for building on existing strengths. Staff and union representatives have indicated willingness to participate in forward-looking discussions, provided they occur within the framework of the enterprise agreement and with genuine regard for workload implications.

Conclusion

Deakin University’s withdrawal of the Major Workplace Change proposal demonstrates the power of collective voice in shaping institutional decisions. By listening to staff concerns and union advocacy, leadership has restored a measure of stability at a critical time. The coming months will test the university’s ability to translate this outcome into sustained improvements in consultation practices and organisational culture. For academics, administrators and job seekers watching the sector, the Deakin case offers a clear reminder that successful change in higher education depends on transparency, evidence and respect for the people who deliver the core mission of teaching, research and student support.