Dr. Layli Maparyan’s Vision for Academic Employment Reform:

Published: November 10, 2026

Why Liberia Needs a Dedicated Higher Education Employment Law

Op-Ed

By George S. Tengbeh, Labour Policy and Industrial Relations Advocate

Again, I find myself reflecting on the wisdom, foresight and institutional vision of the President of the University of Liberia, Dr. Layli Maparyan, Ph.D. Her recent call for the establishment of a dedicated national employment law for Liberia’s higher education sector is not just an administrative recommendation. It is a major labor policy intervention designed to tackle a long-standing structural weakness in the country’s employment regulatory framework.

I am professionally trained in labor economic policy, having undertaken academic training in Labor Policy and Globalization and continue to be active in the areas of Human Resources and Industrial Relations and therefore find her arguments compelling, timely and consistent with the realities of modern employment relations within higher education.

I have always believed that Dr. Maparyan has the wisdom and vision to lead the University of Liberia to meaningful institutional transformation. Her latest intervention only adds weight to that conviction.

The proposal is of particular significance because it addresses not only the immediate administrative problems of the University of Liberia but also a national policy question: whether Liberia’s existing employment legislation adequately recognizes and regulates the peculiar nature of academic employment.

And this answer needs serious rethinking, as Dr. Maparyan has rightly pointed out.

Academic Employment Is Not Regular Employment

On November 3, 2026, while testifying before the Liberian Senate, Dr. Maparyan argued persuasively that the existing legal framework governing employment, particularly the Decent Work Act and the Civil Service Act, fails to adequately address the unique characteristics of academic employment.

In her own words:

“These jobs are very unique, especially for faculty, compared to other jobs. These rules do not sufficiently accommodate this type of employment. “People who work in higher education need a different set of rules.”

This statement reveals a fundamental flaw in our governing system of employment.

Academic employment is not simply an extension of the traditional civil service employment. University professors, lecturers, researchers, academic administrators and other higher education professionals work in a unique professional environment that includes teaching duties, research responsibilities, academic freedom, professional independence, institutional service, collective representation and specialized career advancement.

And these responsibilities and professional expectations are what differentiate academic employment from many other forms of employment.

It’s not that a university lecturer is just an employee who turns up and does routine administrative jobs. The position entails professional, intellectual, institutional, and societal responsibilities outside the classroom. Academic professionals are expected to engage in teaching, research, knowledge production, student mentoring, institutional governance, and professional and ethical standards.

Such realities demand a regulatory framework which understands and sufficiently protects the specific nature of academic work.

International Experience Points to the Need to Protect Academic Employment

Liberia is not unique in its recognition of the specialness of academic employment. International experience shows that countries have created legal and institutional frameworks to provide for the professional responsibilities of university employees.

For example, the South African Constitution explicitly recognizes academic freedom and freedom of scientific research in Section 16(1)(d), while Section 23 guaranties important labor rights, including freedom of association, collective bargaining and the right to strike. It provides for further mechanisms for collective bargaining and for the resolution of employment disputes under its Labor Relations Act of 1995.

Section 202 of the Education Reform Act 1988 in the United Kingdom similarly recognizes the need to protect academic staff against dismissal or loss of institutional privileges for exercising legitimate academic freedom .

These cases show that academic employment is no matter of traditional administrative regulations. It requires a framework that recognizes the professional independence, employment rights and institutional responsibilities associated with higher education.

The point, therefore, is not that the existing labor laws do not apply to university employees. Rather, they fail to fully reflect the institutional and professional complexities of academic employment.

The Industrial Relations Dimension: A Legal Gap That Cannot Be Ignored Any Longer

Perhaps the most telling part of Dr Maparyan’s presentation was her reference to industrial action by university workers.

“The University could have taken up the matter strictly through the Civil Service Act which prohibits civil servants from striking and the affected employees were required to follow the prescribed administrative and legal processes,” she said.

But she admitted that this approach would not necessarily provide a suitable framework for dealing with the realities of the academic employment relationship.

She said:

‘‘The Civil Service Act essentially says that civil servants are not allowed to strike. Therefore, we do not have the legal framework to address the particular situation we are facing.”

This is a matter that merits serious national consideration.

The challenge, however, is that Liberia’s existing employment and industrial relations frameworks do not provide a clear and comprehensive arrangement to address the peculiar circumstances of academic employment in public higher education institutions.

Workers have general protections under the Decent Work Act of 2015, including the right to freely associate and collectively bargain. However, Section 1.5(c)(i) excludes employment under the Civil Service Agency Act except where expressly provided.

Meanwhile the Civil Service Standing Orders detailed the administrative arrangements governing government employment, including appointments, discipline, salaries and grievance procedures. However, they do not provide an industrial relations framework specific to the particular employment relationships in universities.

It is therefore important to clarify how academic employees, their representative organizations and the university administrations should conduct collective bargaining, resolve employment disputes and exercise their respective rights and responsibilities.

A finely tuned framework is needed for industrial relations in universities, taking into account the rights and responsibilities of employers and employees, the role of faculty associations and trade unions, collective bargaining processes, dispute resolution mechanisms, and the continuity of academic services.

Comparative Experiences of Collective Bargaining

Australia is a useful example of adapting collective bargaining to university employment. Under the Fair Work Act 2009, universities may negotiate enterprise agreements which set out particular terms of employment for academic staff.

For instance, the University of Wollongong has its own Academic Staff Enterprise Agreement, which was approved by the Fair Work Commission in 2024. These agreements show how matters relating to academic workloads, employment categories, career progression, working conditions and other professional duties can be negotiated within a recognized national employment framework.

This approach holds important lessons for Liberia. A specific academic employment law should establish a clear legal framework for collective bargaining between university administrations and representative organizations of academic employees. This would enable employment negotiations to focus not only on remuneration but also on the wider conditions that shape professional welfare, institutional participation and the quality of higher education.

A university is more than a government office. Academic institution functioning on a relationship of reciprocal responsibility between management and professional employees.

When disputes arise, the law should provide clear, predictable and fair processes for resolving those disputes. It must protect the legitimate labor rights of employees, but without unduly compromising institutional governance, academic programs and the interests of students.

Insufficiently tailored employment regulations can create uncertainty for both university administrations and their employees. It may make handling industrial disputes more difficult, reduce the predictability of employment decisions, and render the implementation of collective agreements unnecessary.

This is exactly the reason why we need a dedicated academic employment law.

Collective Bargaining Has to Be More Than Wages

Another particularly important part of the President’s argument is her acknowledgment that academic employment is a much broader thing than remuneration.

She went on:

“If you had that legal framework it would make it much easier to negotiate and implement collective bargaining agreements. Moreover, the hiring of academics is about much more than salaries. A full policy document needs to be developed to properly address all aspects of academic employment.”

This is probably one of the most important statements of her presentation.

In the labor economics and industrial relations fields, employment is not measured only by the amount an employee gets at the end of the month. It also deals with job security, working conditions, occupational welfare, career development, professional recognition, rights at work, social protection, participation in institutions and fair employment procedures.

Academic professionals in Liberia have an immediate stake in these issues.

An inclusive academic employment framework should address several key areas:

1. Employment security: Set out clear standards for recruitment, appointments, contract renewals, tenure where applicable, promotion, disciplinary procedures, and termination.
2. Collective bargaining: Establish a legal framework for negotiating, implementing, monitoring, and enforcing collective bargaining agreements between university administrations and representative organizations of employees.
3. Academic Freedom and Professional Autonomy: Offer sufficient protections for teaching, research, scholarly expression and professional judgment while maintaining legitimate institutional accountability.
4. Compensation and employee welfare: Address transparent salary structures, benefits, pensions, social protection, occupational welfare and other employment entitlements.
5. Career development: Clear promotion pathways, professional growth opportunities, research support and institutional recognition.
6. Dispute Resolution: Establish fair, accessible and effective mechanisms for the resolution of employment disputes, grievances and industrial disputes.
7. Institutional accountability: Clearly set out the responsibilities of university administrations and put in place safeguards against arbitrary employment decisions, discrimination, and unfair labor practices.

These provisions would help to create a more predictable, equitable, and professional employment environment for those who spend their careers in higher education.

New Academic Employment Law Must Supplement Existing Labor Rights, Not Undermine Them

While I fully support Dr. Maparyan’s call for a dedicated legal framework for academic employment, there is a guiding principle that must be emphasized in the formulation of such a framework: the proposed legislation must not weaken, restrict or undermine the existing labor rights and protections enjoyed by academic employees under the Decent Work Act of Liberia.

The aim should not be to create a parallel employment system where academic professionals are excluded from the general protection enjoyed by other workers. It should, rather, establish a complementary legal framework which, in conjunction with existing labor legislation, takes account of the specific professional, institutional and employment realities of higher education.

The Need for Remedial Measures in the Present Legislature

A closer examination of Liberia’s existing legislation raises important questions that a new law on academic employment must address.

Section 1.5(c)(i) of the Decent Work Act of 2015 states that the Act does not apply to work that is within the scope of the Civil Service Agency Act under Chapter 66 of the Executive Law, unless otherwise expressly set forth.

Section 3.3.1 of the Civil Service Standing Orders also states that the regulations apply to government officials and employees paid a fixed salary. Section 3.3.2 excludes certain categories of employees including government contract employees.

Such provisions raise important questions of employment classification and protection of academic professionals, particularly part-time lecturers, adjunct faculty members and other university employees who are engaged under contractual arrangements.

There is no overall sector-specific system within the existing frameworks to deal with the various types of academic employment, their professional duties, job security and collective representation.

The proposed legislation should therefore clarify the relationship between the Decent Work Act, the Civil Service Agency framework and the employment arrangements of higher education institutions.

It should aim to close regulatory gaps, remove uncertainty and establish enforceable standards for academic employment while safeguarding the fundamental labor rights already recognized under Liberian law.

Thus, academic workers should not have fewer labor rights because their work is different. They should have existing labor protections and then additional protections that are unique to their profession.

This is an important distinction to make.

The proposed law should reinforce, not undermine, the rights to fair treatment, freedom of association, collective bargaining, decent working conditions, social protection and appropriate dispute resolution.

It should also clearly state the respective duties of the university administrations, governing authorities, faculty associations and academic employees.

A well-designed framework would fill gaps in existing legislation without creating contradictory legal obligations, weakening current protections, or giving institutional management too much discretion over academic employees.

This must be progressive legislation that protects the workers, but also enhances the ability of university administrations to effectively run institutions.

“The ultimate goal must be to protect academic professionals, promote industrial harmony, improve institutional governance and enhance the quality of higher education in Liberia.”

Not Just a University of Liberia Policy, a National Framework

I am especially encouraged by the President’s suggestion that this proposed legislation should apply to public institutions of higher education and possibly to private colleges and universities.

She said,

‘‘I believe that we require new legislation in the field of educational employment. Such a law should apply to all of our public institutions and perhaps private higher education institutions as well.”

This is a crucial difference.

The proposal is larger than the problem of employment challenges at the University of Liberia. This relates to the development of national standards for academic employment in the higher education sector of Liberia.

Wherever one teaches – be it the University of Liberia, another public university, public college or private institution of higher learning – there must be clearly established standards to protect professional dignity, promote fair employment practices and strengthen institutional accountability.

Harmonization of employment standards could be underpinned by a national framework, while still allowing individual institutions the flexibility they need for their own operational and academic requirements.

I also see a possibility of linking this proposal with the broader vision of a University System of Liberia, which Dr. Maparyan has championed as a means of increasing cooperation among institutions of higher learning.

A coordinated system of universities, along with a coherent framework for academic employment, would be an important step toward modernizing the governance of higher education in Liberia.

It is important that the proposed national framework should emerge from meaningful consultations with the university administrations, faculty associations, labor organizations, Ministry of Labor, Civil Service Agency, the Legislature and other relevant stakeholders.

It should be guided by comparative international experience and the principles of decent work, academic freedom, social dialog and effective institutional governance.

This Proposal Must Be Taken Seriously by the Government

This proposal should start a real national dialog between the Government and Legislature of Liberia.

The Ministry of Labor, Civil Service Agency, university administrations, faculty associations, labor organizations and other relevant stakeholders should strive to develop a comprehensive legal framework to complement existing labor legislation, while providing specific protections for academic employment.

It should include a review of present employment laws, sincere consultation with the academic professionals and identification of regulatory gaps that need legislative attention.

The challenge is that this must not be yet another policy document that sits on paper. It must create enforceable standards, as well as institutional responsibility, effective monitoring mechanisms and accessible remedies for those employees whose rights have been violated.

The Government should also realize that to invest in the welfare and professional security of academic employees is to invest in national development.

We cannot ask for better university rankings, research output, international collaborations, graduate employability and higher educational standards if we don’t address the employment conditions of the people who are responsible for achieving these goals.

My View: This Reform Has Been Long Overdue

“For too long, the employment realities of academic professionals have not been given their due policy attention in Liberia.

We cannot build universities, expand enrollment, engage in international academic partnerships and demand better educational outcomes whilst ignoring the employment security, professional welfare and institutional rights of academic employees.

A university’s strength cannot be measured only by buildings, programs, student numbers or graduation statistics. This is equally reflected in the way it recruits, protects, compensates, develops and treats its staff. As a person whose professional interests and work are closely related to labor policy, decent work, human resource management and industrial relations, I see this proposal as a necessary intervention in the future of Liberia’s higher education system.

Thank you again Dr Maparyan for seeing beyond the immediate administrative challenges of the University of Liberia.

Your argument is more than simply dealing with an industrial dispute or reacting to the demands of university employees. This is about identifying a structural flaw in our national employment framework and proposing a permanent remedy.

This woman has a remarkable level of wisdom and vision to take the University of Liberia to a better future, I keep saying. Her latest proposal is another example of the kind of institutional thinking Liberia needs. Leadership is more than simply holding an office or managing the daily affairs of an institution. This is about identifying problems that have been around for a long time, the consequences over the long term, and having the courage to propose reforms that will benefit generations to come.

Liberia does not need to replace the existing labor law. It needs to update the relationship between general labor law, public service employment law and the distinctive realities of academic employment. This is the type of leadership that looks beyond the immediate challenges and considers the institutional legacy being created. It is a late-in-the-day policy, but it is needed and deserves national priority. Liberia must protect its academic professionals because as we protect those who teach, research and produce knowledge, we are investing in the future of the nation. The issue is no longer whether academic employment merits special policy attention. But the more important question is how fast Liberia can translate this necessary proposal into a comprehensive and enforceable legal framework.

This reform is needed now.