The College Lecturers Association of Zimbabwe (COLAZ) has accused the Higher Education Examinations Council (HEXCO) of delaying payments to lecturers who marked recent national examinations while allegedly paying its own staff and other personnel involved in post-marking activities.
COLAZ said the delayed payments had left lecturers who travelled from different parts of the country to take part in the marking exercise out of pocket, despite them promised marking fees and travel and subsistence allowances.
“It has now been three months since the HEXCO examinations marking exercise ended, yet the majority of lecturers who sacrificed their time and resources to perform this national duty remain unpaid,” COLAZ said.
“This is an insult to the dedicated professionals who form the backbone of our technical and vocational education system.”
On this topic
However, HEXCO Director of Examinations and Quality Assurance, Wikirefu Sonono, disputed claims the lecturers had gone unpaid for three months, saying the examinations were written in June and marking was conducted in July.
COLAZ described the alleged failure to pay the majority of lecturers as an insult to professionals who play a central role in Zimbabwe’s technical and vocational education system.
The association said examination marking was not a favour but a national responsibility undertaken by lecturers to safeguard the credibility of the country’s education system.
COLAZ further alleged HEXCO staff involved in marking, external assessment and verification had already received their payments, while lecturers responsible for marking scripts were still waiting.
“The discriminatory payment practice suggests a hierarchy of worth that is both arbitrary and offensive. Are the lecturers in other disciplines less deserving? Are their contributions to the national examination system somehow less valuable?” asked the association.
The lecturers’ association said it was particularly concerned by allegations that senior HEXCO officials and other employees had received their allowances while external lecturers remained unpaid.
“The Director and other HEXCO staff received their allowances without delay. This speaks volumes about priorities,” COLAZ said.
“The very people responsible for administering the system have ensured their own pockets are filled while those who do the actual work of marking scripts are left to fend for themselves.”
COLAZ also questioned why activities conducted after the marking exercise, including external assessment and verification, had allegedly been paid for while outstanding claims by markers remained unsettled.
“This suggests that the problem is not a lack of funds but a deliberate choice in how those funds are allocated,” said the association, which added that the alleged delays formed a pattern of disrespect towards lecturers.
The association also claimed some lecturers who had previously complained about non-payment and ill-treatment were subsequently excluded from future marking exercises.
“This is not the first time HEXCO has treated lecturers with contempt,” COLAZ said.
“In the past, lecturers who spoke out against non-payment and ill-treatment were dropped from marking exercises. This culture of silencing dissent is unacceptable.”
COLAZ also called for the immediate payment of all outstanding marking fees and travel and subsistence allowances.
In an interview with CITE, Sonono challenged the association’s assertion that lecturers had been waiting for three months, saying the timeline presented by COLAZ was inaccurate.
“Three months from when? The exam was written in June, marking was done in July, and this is August.”
Asked why lecturers were raising the allegations, Sonono said he could not speak for them but insisted HEXCO needed specific details to investigate individual cases of non-payment.
“Maybe there are other issues. Let them follow the channel they use to get the actual information from their college,” he said.
Sonono said HEXCO processes payments through institutional and administrative structures and said lecturers who had not received their money should raise the matter through their heads of department and college principals.
He said principals could then formally write to HEXCO identifying the affected lecturers and departments so they could act.
“We can’t act on information that has no names or dates. Payments are done through Accounts and if I go there, what do I say when they ask me who has not been paid?” Sonono said, adding he was aware of at least one case involving a lecturer whose payment could not initially be processed because of missing banking details.
He said HEXCO had been informed payments had largely been processed but acknowledged some outstanding cases could exist due to administrative or banking-related problems.
“There can be a problem that can be addressed. If we know how many have not been paid, it can help us see and maybe it’s a pile of claims somewhere not processed yet,” Sonono said.
Sonono added HEXCO had recently asked for details of all markers who had not received payment.
“On Monday we said, can you send a message to all markers who didn’t receive their money? If we are not getting that, we begin to wonder what kind of marker wants to remain anonymous. It is better if we have details,” Sonono said.
He said there was nothing wrong with lecturers demanding payment for work they had completed, but HEXCO required sufficient information to trace and resolve the outstanding claims.
“When you do a job, you must be paid,” Sonono said.
However, COLAZ sources maintained the issue was more widespread than isolated administrative errors, insisting exams were written between May and June, with marking beginning towards the end of June and continuing into July.
“If you see people approaching the media, it means they would have tried other means possible and failed,” the source said.
COLAZ sources also raised separate concerns over the selection and deployment of lecturers for marking, alleging in some cases, lecturers were assigned to mark subjects they did not teach, raising questions about the quality of the marking process.
“You find someone lecturing Accounts ending up marking Research Methods. How, when they don’t teach that subject?” the source said, alleging some lecturers were selected because of personal connections.
“It means there is corruption.”
Leave a Reply