Recommendation not implemented: Undisclosed allowance for ICT Lecturers at MCAST investigated by the Commissioner for Education

Recommendation not implemented: Undisclosed allowance for ICT Lecturers at MCAST investigated by the Commissioner for Education

Published May 09, 2025

In accordance with Article 22(4) of the Ombudsman Act, the Ombudsman and the Commissioner for Education have forwarded to the House of Representatives the Final Opinion on a complaint alleging improper discrimination and lack of transparency in connection with a secret top-up allowance.

The complaint

On 20 June 2024, a teaching member of staff at the Malta College of Arts, Science and Technology (MCAST) lodged a complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman. The complainant alleged improper discrimination and lack of transparency in connection with a secret top-up allowance of €8,160 per year, reportedly awarded to a select group of ICT lecturers at MCAST. According to the complainant, access to this allowance was limited to staff who were personally approached to complete a short course, leaving other qualified lecturers unaware or excluded from the scheme.

Facts and findings

The investigation revealed that the top-up allowance was originally introduced in 2006, when Smart City Malta was in its early stages. A Cabinet Memorandum had expressed concerns that MCAST’s ICT Institute was struggling to attract and retain qualified lecturers due to competition from the private sector. The allowance was intended as an incentive to align MCAST’s academic salaries with industry standards and attract ICT graduates into teaching roles.

Although the allowance had official approval, it was never incorporated into any collective agreement and was subsequently absorbed into the administrative practices of the ICT Institute. MCAST itself confirmed that the allowance and eligibility criteria were known only within the ICT Institute and not among staff in other departments who taught similar ICT-related subjects. Crucially, the allowance was not included in publicly advertised vacancies, raising serious concerns about transparency.

The College maintained that ICT lecturers were informed of the allowance by internal email and during recruitment, but acknowledged that others were not made aware. The Commissioner noted that the secrecy surrounding the allowance -- whether deliberate or due to negligence -- had created an unfair and improperly discriminatory situation, depriving other lecturers of the opportunity to advocate for equal pay or make informed career decisions.

A 2023 decision of the Industrial Tribunal similarly criticised MCAST for continuing to award this allowance despite the original rationale for its introduction no longer applying, and apparently without renewed authorisation.

Conclusions and recommendations

The Commissioner for Education concluded that the complaint was justified and that the allegations were substantially proven. The practice of limiting knowledge of and access to the top-up allowance to a select group of lecturers amounted to maladministration under Article 22(1)(b) and (d) of the Ombudsman Act. The lack of transparency was deemed both improperly discriminatory and wrong in principle.

The Commissioner strongly recommended that MCAST immediately publish the details and eligibility criteria for this allowance on its website. Furthermore, in the interest of transparency and accountability, MCAST should disclose the number of lecturers who have received the allowance since its inception (without naming individuals) and the total amount disbursed over the years.

Outcome

Since MCAST did not implement the recommendations made by the Commissioner for Education, on 14 April 2025 the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Commissioner sent the report to the Prime Minister. As no action was taken, the report was subsequently forwarded to the Speaker of the House of Representatives to be laid on the Table of the House.