Non-teaching staff of Madras University call off protest
"Since the syndicate meeting has been moved to next week, we have decided to call off our strike. The Monday meeting will primarily involve discussions between employee associations to ensure that this pay cut agenda is not brought up in the syndicate meeting ever again," said Balakrishnan, president of the Madras University staff association.
According to the employees, who were on a sit-in protest outside the PRO office on the Madras University Campus, the proposed pay cut would reduce the salaries of employees such as attenders, senior attenders, section officers, assistant and deputy registrars by 10,000 to 30,000 on average.
Their current salary ranges from 40,000 to 1,30,000 a month.
You Can Also Check:
Chennai AQI
|
Weather in Chennai
|
Bank Holidays in Chennai
|
Public Holidays in Chennai
"At one point in time, prior to 1989, we received salaries on a par with RBI employees. But on the recommendations of Dr Venugopal and Dr Arumugam committees, our salary structure was revised and fixed on a par with those in the Secretariat," Balakrishnan pointed out.
A retired assistant registrar of the varsity lamented, "The govt cannot cite fund shortage to cut down the pay of university workers while maintaining the status quo for those at the Secretariat. Moreover, when the next pay revision is scheduled for 2026, why is the govt bent on moving this agenda in the syndicate all of a sudden? The employees, therefore, are well within their right to protest."
Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with
Friendship Day wishes
,
messages
and
quotes
!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hindu
32 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Stanford University lays off over 360 employees, citing Trump policies
Stanford University said on Tuesday (August 5, 2025) it has laid off over 360 employees, citing budget constraints that it attributed to the federal funding policies of U.S. President Donald Trump. The Trump administration has threatened to cut federal funds for universities over pro-Palestinian protests against U.S. ally Israel's war in Gaza, climate initiatives, transgender policies and diversity, equity and inclusion programs. "Stanford is in the process of making budget reductions," a university spokesperson said in emailed statement in response to media reports on the layoffs. "Last week, many schools and units made staff workforce reductions. In total, 363 layoffs occurred." The Californian university said in June it had made a $140 million reduction in the general funds budget for the upcoming year due to "a challenging fiscal environment shaped in large part by federal policy changes affecting higher education." Last week, the Trump administration froze more than $330 million in funding for the University of California, Los Angeles, after alleging the university failed to prevent a hostile environment for Jewish and Israeli students since campus protests erupted after the start of Israel's war in Gaza. The Los Angeles Times reported on Tuesday (August 5, 2025) that UCLA leaders were preparing to negotiate with the Trump administration over the freeze. The government has recently settled its probes with Columbia University, which agreed to pay over $220 million, and Brown University, which said it will pay $50 million. Both institutions accepted certain demands made by the government. Talks to settle with Harvard University remain ongoing. Rights advocates have raised concerns about academic freedom and free speech over the government's actions. The Trump administration alleges universities allowed antisemitism during pro-Palestinian campus protests. Protesters, including some Jewish groups, say the government wrongly equates their criticism of Israel's military assault in Gaza and its occupation of Palestinian territories with antisemitism, and advocacy for Palestinian rights with support for extremism.
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
UCLA loses $584 million in federal grants amid fallout over Gaza protests
The Trump administration has frozen $584 million in federal funding for the University of California, Los Angeles, after accusing the school of mishandling pro-Palestinian protests on its number of protests occurred at UCLA last year. Demonstrators, among them Jewish organisations, argue that the government mistakenly conflates their criticism of Israel's military actions in Gaza and its control over Palestinian lands with antisemitic intent, and views their support for Palestinian rights as an endorsement of LARGE-SCALE LOSS"Currently, a total of approximately $584 million in extramural award funding is suspended and at risk," UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said in an update on the university website. Frenk had earlier posted a message on his social media handle on X about the large-scale loss of the people of the country who rely on breakthroughs and innovations stemming from the institution while stating an obvious loss to the faculty and recently received notice that the federal government is suspending certain research funding to @UCLA. This is not just a loss for our faculty and researchers. It's a loss for the people across the country who rely on the breakthroughs and innovations that begin right here. Julio Frenk (@UCLAchancellor) August 2, 2025The Los Angeles Times reported UCLA leaders were preparing to negotiate with the government over the freeze. The White House had no immediate response to a request for PAYS $6 MILLIONLast week, the university agreed to pay over $6 million to settle a lawsuit by some students and a professor who alleged was also sued earlier this year over a 2024 attack on pro-Palestinian protesters at the height of the US campus protest government has in recent weeks settled its probes with Columbia University, which agreed to pay over $220 million, and Brown University, which said it will pay $50 million. Both institutions accepted certain government demands. Talks to settle with Harvard University are ATTEMPTS BLOCKEDRights advocates have raised concerns about the curtailing of academic freedom and free Trump administration has also attempted to deport foreign student protesters but faced judicial University's student-run newspaper sued the Trump administration on Wednesday, saying student writers were censoring themselves and turning down assignments related to Gaza to avoid being targeted for deportation.- EndsWith inputs from ReutersTune InTrending Reel
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Stanford's student newspaper sues Trump administration over ‘ideological deportation' of pro-Palestinian students
The Stanford Daily , a student-run newspaper at Stanford University, has filed a federal lawsuit against the Trump administration, challenging what it calls an unconstitutional policy that targets noncitizen students over their political speech. The case, filed in a California federal court on Wednesday, takes aim at two specific provisions within the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). These provisions, according to the complaint, have enabled the administration to pursue deportation of international students engaged in pro-Palestinian activism. The plaintiffs argue that this approach infringes on First Amendment protections and has created a climate of fear among noncitizen students on college campuses. Fear of deportation leads to self-censorship on campus Attorneys representing The Stanford Daily and two unnamed former international students say that staff members have begun to avoid writing or publishing articles on the war in Gaza, or are requesting previous coverage be removed, fearing that their immigration status could be jeopardised. According to court filings, the chilling effect has intensified since March 2025, when the administration began using the INA to remove lawfully present noncitizens on the grounds of their political expression. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like With temperatures hitting 95°F, this is the mini air conditioner everyone's buying in the U.S News of the Discovery The attorneys argue that these actions violate core constitutional protections by punishing individuals for speech that would otherwise be protected. Legal focus on two provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act At the heart of the legal challenge are two sections of the INA. One grants the Secretary of State broad discretion to revoke a noncitizen's visa at any time. The other allows the secretary to determine a person's removability if their beliefs are viewed as compromising 'a compelling United States foreign policy interest.' These tools, the lawsuit claims, have been selectively deployed to silence dissent related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The legal team, which includes attorneys from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, contends that the government's actions have already reshaped student behaviour on campus. 'The First Amendment does not allow the government to retaliate against individuals simply because it disapproves of their message,' the lawyers wrote in the filing. 'When federal statutes are used to suppress protected speech, constitutional principles must prevail. ' Ongoing legal scrutiny of the administration's immigration actions The case follows a separate bench trial in Boston that concluded on July 21. During that trial, members of the Trump administration testified under oath about the government's coordination between the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the State Department in identifying noncitizen students and professors for immigration review based on their political views. That trial, overseen by US District Judge William Young, now awaits a decision on whether the administration's 'ideological deportation policy' unlawfully chilled protected speech in violation of constitutional rights. Legal experts suggest the outcomes of both cases could have wide-reaching implications for how universities support international students engaged in political discourse. For students working in campus journalism, especially those on temporary visas, the evolving policy landscape has introduced new layers of complexity. Some international students are reevaluating the risks associated with participating in editorial decisions or publishing content that may be perceived as controversial. The Stanford Daily's legal action signals a broader concern that self-censorship could become normalised if legal safeguards are not clarified. As the academic year approaches, institutions may also be called to reassess their support structures for international students facing legal and political uncertainty. For many, these developments are not just about legal protections, but about the core values of academic freedom and open expression on campus. TOI Education is on WhatsApp now. Follow us here. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
