Quackademia: A Personal Reflection on the Prevalence of Insecure Employment in Australian Universities

In August last year, the NTEU reported that two in three people employed by Australian universities do not have secure employment. In April this year, The Conversation published an article about the ‘benefits and challenges’ of employing casual academics. The authors of the article advocate for university administration to manage their casual staff more equitably and effectively, and to offer more permanent positions. At the same time, however, the article suggests that casual staff ‘pose risks’ to student satisfaction and the quality of the student learning experience. In response to backlash on Twitter and to a shared push by several academics to publish a rejoinder to the article, The Conversation cited their ‘no response’ policy and encouraged readers to reply to the article in the comments section instead: a move at odds with the publication’s mandate to facilitate conversation and add to debate. This paper turns a critical eye to The Conversation’s charter and shares anecdotal evidence of some of the outlet’s questionable publishing codes and practices. These stories are garnered from the experiences of several arts and humanities academics who publish – or attempt to publish – with the media outlet. The paper offers insights into the problems instigated and exacerbated by the process of casualisation