It's called " Law 240/10 of 30 December 2010, and has led many students, researchers, professors in the streets last autumn and early winter. I was not passionate protest, and above all its forms, as the ideological and eschatological language that was used seemed dictated more by the logic of opposition that comparisons on . Comparisons, Incidentally, by the Ministerial were never offered or permitted.
But look ahead. Now is the law of the state (although there are still several decrees) and there must adapt. The themes
that more had to heat the protests were related to the so-called "governance" (ie the composition and roles of the Academic Senate and Board of Directors) and the reform of procedures for "recruitment" (ie recruitment and career progression), and in particular the abolition of researchers in perpetuity.
On the issue of governance I can not have an opinion, because a lot depend on the statutes of each university will have to approve. And arguments are too abstract for my poor mind of an engineer.
On the issue of recruitment not want to get: The previous system was accused of being cumbersome and patronage, and the future will be equally cumbersome and patronage. Instinct would tell me that it would be easier and more effective to try to "fix" an existing system (which was not perfect, but which are known to experience good and bad) rather than throwing it overboard and create a brand new ( whose defects are not yet known). But perhaps consumerism has arrived here too ... But these
are not the real problems. Or rather, are changes, we do not know if they will have a devastating impact or marginal, but all things are part of the evolution of the system, that somehow we can rule .
The real problems are hidden in other commucci and articulate, which no one has ever paid attention. Take for example
art. 18, paragraph 5. Article 18 seems almost innocuous, with the title "Call of the professors", which specifies the mechanisms by which universities professors call, beyond the evaluation of the budget (the university) for approval and country ('s aspirant professor). Nothing wrong with that. The calls are made already. It is rare that there are some surprises in this process. So it's a harmless article. But no
.
The last paragraph (paragraph 5, of course) describes what the professionals who can join "groups and research projects [...] and [to] carry out the activities' of ; research. " And the best news is that many figures previously legal, become excluded. You can no longer enter into contracts of continuous collaboration for research purposes. Nor occasional collaboration. Nor contracts technical term. But even scholarships. The research, however, can be made "solely" (sic) by the permanent staff, from students and the research fellows.
Anyone who has had experience in funded research projects (national, regional, European) or in collaboration with companies, he knows that what is essential in order to "bring home" the contract is to have competent and dedicated staff the project. The companies claim that we professors and researchers follow and train the young staff we do work on the project: in this way at the end of the project will results of quality and personal ready to be engaged. European projects require that you invest many man-months , and so it is necessary take different people.
The effect of the constraints will be very simple: become more difficult or almost impossible to take certain types of staff, because the constraints imposed on research grants (minimum and maximum degrees, amounts, bound, ...) and PhD (annual contest, three-year laughable amount, ...) are not compatible with many requests from the outside.
The results? Certainly less expense personnel. Certainly less precarious University (not because they are stabilized, but it will make the precarious elsewhere). Certainly less revenue. Yes, this will be the reduction of the cash flows of universities . At least of those technologies, where the mechanisms are the ones that I have outlined. This
yes, it's damage. Real. Quantifiable. Immediate. NGOs.
0 comments:
Post a Comment