The University of Liberia (UL) is facing internal discord over faculty compensation and working conditions, with the Adjunct Faculty Association (AFA-UL) diverging from the more militant stance adopted by the University of Liberia Faculty Association (ULFA). ULFA initiated an indefinite strike on August 29, 2025, halting all academic activities until a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) is signed by the university administration, the Liberian government, and ULFA itself. This drastic action followed a July mandate from ULFA’s general assembly, directing its leadership to address longstanding faculty welfare concerns. However, AFA-UL, representing adjunct faculty, has publicly distanced itself from the strike, advocating for continued dialogue instead of disruptive action.
AFA-UL’s press release, issued on September 3, 2025, acknowledges ULFA’s right to protest but emphasizes its own commitment to solutions that don’t jeopardize the progress of higher education in Liberia. The association expressed its disapproval of ULFA’s unilateral decision to strike without consulting adjunct faculty, highlighting a perceived disregard for their contributions and concerns. AFA-UL underscored its dedication to advocating for the specific needs of adjunct faculty, including timely and equitable payment based on qualifications and experience, access to professional development opportunities, and clear pathways for transitioning into full-time positions.
The differing approaches of the two faculty bodies expose a potential rift within the university’s academic staff. ULFA’s strike represents a more aggressive tactic, aimed at pressuring the administration and government through disruption. In contrast, AFA-UL favors a more conciliatory approach, prioritizing dialogue and negotiation to achieve its goals. This divergence underscores the complexities of collective action within a diverse faculty body, where varying employment statuses and priorities can lead to differing strategies for addressing shared concerns.
While AFA-UL has opted not to join the strike, it shares some of ULFA’s underlying concerns regarding faculty welfare. Both associations are ultimately striving for improved working conditions and recognition for their members. However, their chosen methods reflect differing perspectives on the most effective means to achieve these shared goals. The situation at the University of Liberia highlights the delicate balance between solidarity and autonomy within a complex organization, where different groups may share common objectives but disagree on the best path to achieve them.
AFA-UL’s decision to distance itself from the strike may also reflect a pragmatic assessment of the potential risks and rewards of such action. While a strike can be a powerful tool for achieving change, it can also carry significant costs, including disruption to students’ education and potential damage to the university’s reputation. By choosing to continue dialogue with the administration, AFA-UL is signaling its preference for a less disruptive approach, while still advocating for the needs of its members.
The ongoing situation at the University of Liberia underscores the importance of effective communication and collaboration within academic institutions. The divergent approaches of ULFA and AFA-UL highlight the need for inclusive decision-making processes that take into account the perspectives and priorities of all faculty members, regardless of their employment status. The success of future negotiations and the long-term stability of the university will likely depend on the ability of these different groups to find common ground and work together towards shared solutions. Meanwhile, the students at the University of Liberia remain caught in the crossfire, their education hanging in the balance as the faculty and administration grapple with these internal conflicts.
