Proposal for a new career ladder at the University

“It is not reasonable for such a large proportion of the University's employees to have temporary or insecure employment conditions and not be able or allowed to participate in the University’s activities, decisions and other things in the same way,” says Analyst Ann Fust.

One of the most widespread proposals in the inquiry is therefore to establish additional positions as assistant senior lecturer, intended to be the first career step in a Swedish “tenure track system”, allowing young researchers to be promoted to senior lecturer and later in their career to professor.

“It is of the utmost importance that at least the first appointment step in such a ‘tenure track system’, i.e. the assistant senior lecturer, is also subject to competition when being filled,” continues Ann Fust.

 

According to the analysts, this type of position should thus be expanded at the University as an element of gradually phasing out researcher positions. The proposal for revised Appointment Regulations was recently discussed at the University Board meeting and is now being circulated for commenting within the University. The inquiry, with proposed measures, was conducted by Ann Fust, former Director General of the Swedish Research Council. Among other things, she previously served as analyst for the Swedish Government Official Report (SOU) on Carrier Paths for Young Researchers (which may also be of significance in this context), where she collaborated with Magnus Ödman, Deputy Administrative Director at Uppsala University.

The key words behind the inquiry proposals are quality, meritocracy, collegiality and employer responsibility.

 

Each year, the University has a number of reassignment cases, most of which relate to researchers. This results in about 55 dismissals per year. The inquiry indicates that repeated researcher appointments over a prolonged period of time – where the researcher is given a certificate of employment in one hand and a termination letter in the other – must be avoided, not least in an overall perspective for the University’s long-term development.

A researcher position is not a teaching position that is regulated in the Higher Education Ordinance. Similarly, it is not a post-doctoral position in accordance with the collective agreement. The researcher position is also used for several different work duties and is given several different titles, but normally relates to a researcher who has defended their doctoral thesis and is employed primarily for research purposes. Characteristically, the funding is external and does not, in the main, burden the higher education institution’s basic appropriations.

 

Positions filled in competition 

 

The position of assistant senior lecturer was introduced in 2016, with the aim of giving the assistant senior lecturer the opportunity to develop their independence as a researcher and qualify both scientifically and pedagogically.

 

As pointed out in the inquiry, one difference between the researcher position and the teaching position is that the process for hiring a teacher in competition or to review an application for promotion is thorough, time-consuming, and usually involves an expert procedure, while the process for hiring a researcher cannot be compared in these respects.

“Somewhat pointedly, we can say that we have built up part of the University on meritocratic principles and a common collegial quality culture, while in the other part it is accepted that staff are recruited and terminated without equivalent quality thinking,” says Ann Fust.

 

The inquiry proposes certain safety valves to ensure controlled development; for example, the practice that researchers who have received the most prestigious research grants can be hired as a senior lecturer/professor through a vice-chancellor decision, referred to as the “lift”. The proposal is to regulate this in the Appointment Regulations.

 Staff scientist – important

 

Another proposal in the inquiry relates to staff, referred to as “staff scientists”, who can be technical-administrative staff who do not perform research independently but contribute important research expertise. The analysts suggest that the group be divided into three levels: research assistant, research specialist and research specialist/manager. The last two levels will require a doctoral degree. 

 

However, the inquiry finds that the basic meritocratic perspective, with expert assessment and a collegial process, must be maintained when changing and streamlining the recruitment process, but that different roles in the process should be clarified and implemented, both in academic decision-making processes and in support activities. 

“There must also be a transfer of inspiration and knowledge between different parts of the University.  Uppsala University also acts globally, and the processes should therefore be adapted to be understandable for staff from all over the world,” states Ann Fust.

 

Recruitment of professors

 

Another part of the inquiry relates to the recruitment of professors. Two different methods for recruiting professors are normally applied at Uppsala University, i.e. competition and promotion – a reform implemented in 1999.

The inquiry also finds that promotion to a higher position shall remain a right, but that there must be clear and transparent rules at the university level, well-thought-out criteria, and a clearer process for the work and decision-making. In addition, the position structure must be the same for teaching positions throughout the University. 

 

One viewpoint is that recruitment processes generally take too long at the University. This could result in interested candidates, particularly international ones, losing interest or in a larger number of researchers being hired since the recruitment process for this can be much faster than when advertising a teaching position.

Some proposals therefore relate to the introduction of new working methods, more training in the recruitment committees, and better overall support for this work. 

 

The proposal for this revision of the Appointment Regulations will not only be circulated for commenting, but also discussed and ventilated in different contexts in the autumn, for example in open seminars in August and September.  The University Board is expected to make a decision in the matter in December.