It is an undisputed fact that the University of Malta's role is critical and essential to produce the building blocks for the development of a research-driven and knowledge-based Malta.
EU policy, through the Lisbon Agenda and other strategic initiatives recognise this.
However, unless we are to establish ourselves as perpetual 'laggards', with the attendant implications on Malta's economic growth and competitiveness, our national commitment has to go beyond mere lip service.
It is in this light that one must assess the current dispute declared by the University of Malta Academic Staff Association (UMASA) and Malta Union of Teachers (MUT). The academic staff's collective agreement expired way back in 2003. A realistic collective agreement is pitifully five years overdue - and yet, heel-dragging persists.
It is a national shame that the process of renewing the agreement had to be protracted over a span of five years, and had to come to this. In these circumstances, industrial action is expected and inevitable.
We have faith and trust that the government's intentions and commitment to education are serious. Otherwise, claiming that 'education' is one of the three so-called 'pillars' bolstering our nation's tomorrow, would be a sad sham. Indeed, it is two of those national pillars that are at stake here: education as well as economy. Let not some administrative hurdle compromise the good intentions of all stakeholders and our country's future.
The University is Malta's only degree-awarding higher education institution that offers degree programmes across the full range of faculties and disciplines. In these current dynamic realities, the University must be equipped to directly contribute to the establishment of knowledge-based Malta. If it is to exploit the potential of our nation's 'tomorrow', then the working conditions, resource availability and remuneration incentives offered to the academic staff have to be more than overhauled.
Professors, lecturers and researchers at the University somehow still manage to provide a sterling service. However, insufficient resources, heavier teaching loads and increasingly swelling class sizes make it difficult to engage in research or collaborative projects with other local and international industries or research institutions - or even effectively compete for international research funds and grants.
That professors and lecturers are grossly underpaid is pitifully obvious. It is ironic that in several disciplines, freshly minted graduates start off in industry with a pay packet that earns them more than their University lecturers. Unless salaries and remuneration are brought in line with market realities, our alma mater will experience a brain drain.
The best human capital resides in the most talented and promising knowledge workers, who understandably are most mobile, sought after and poached. Academic staff, being experts in their field, will increasingly seek greener pastures, whether in academia abroad or in enterprise.
Moreover, while it is commendable for those in academia to build bridges with industry, an indirect brain drain could ensue from an increased commitment to members' private practice, such as consulting to industry or government.
This is the key problem that needs to be addressed with urgency - otherwise the role of the University will be seriously compromised.
Benchmarking should ensure that reviewed salaries are not out of line with academic peers at established universities in other developed EU member states. Additionally, one should ensure that the new salaries reflect local market realities and are in line with other professions such as doctors, management consultants, accountants, IT specialists, lawyers, pilots. If this is not done, the academic staff's personal motivations and commitments will prevail.
Fundamentally, at both personal and institutional levels, very few initiatives are ever sustainable in the medium term unless they are 'win-win' and both parties stand to mutually gain.
Given that the last agreement expired in 2003, is it by design that new collective agreements consistently take so long to be drawn up? What is the situation with regard to backdating salaries and benefits to 2003? Or is there some complex 'cost-saving' strategy being schemed while the heels drag on?
Oratory is easy. It is easy to talk about national competitiveness and initiatives aimed at morphing our economy into one driven by high added-value, knowledge-based activity - or about the national strategic importance of investment in knowledge, intellectual capital and education.
On an island bereft of natural resources, save for sun and sea, our people are the only critical resource driving Malta's future. Their resourcefulness in terms of creativity, innovation, and value generation is imperative. This is particularly so, given the transition from yesterday's industrial economies based on low-cost manufacturing to today's knowledge-based societies that thrive on the power of the knowledge worker.
Understandably, nations and enterprises alike deem this the key strategic asset - and invest hugely in intellectual capital in their quest for sustained competitive advantage. Both developed and emerging nations are embracing this reality. They acknowledge that economic performance and competitiveness are increasingly being driven by high added-value and knowledge-based activity.
National policymakers as well as local and foreign industrialists and investors, recently expressed concern at Malta's consistently low performance in pan-EU research and development (R&D) figures as well as a persistent rock bottom placing in innovation scorecard rankings.
It is now high time for the powers that be to pro-actively pursue meaningful negotiations. Otherwise, competitiveness, R&D and innovation EU league tables will continue to confirm Malta's intellectual barrenness. One can only reap what one sows.
Mr Massa and Dr Azzopardi are lecturers in the University of Malta's Department of Management.