I am Hanna  [07.10.21]

Going into science as a young person? That's something you should think twice about in Germany. At least that's the conclusion you can draw if you follow the hashtag #IchBinHanna on Twitter. Since June, postdocs and doctoral candidates have been venting their anger about their precarious working conditions - and demanding change. The shitstorm was sparked by an explanatory video by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, which uses the example of the fictitious biologist "Hanna" to explain the special rules for fixed-term contracts in the scientific field. The video has since been taken offline. The pent-up resentment, however, remains. But where should politicians start? And what room for maneuver do the universities actually have? University President Stephan Dabbert also wants to talk about this as part of the Hohenheim LIVE series on October 4 (11:30 a.m.). The Online Courier asked a Hohenheim doctoral candidate and a postdoc for their opinion in advance.

"In conversations among young scientists, the precarious working conditions and poor future prospects are a constant topic," said doctoral candidate Regine Frener, who sits on the Senate of the University of Hohenheim for the group of academic employees: "Many ask themselves the question: how much are you willing to give for your dream?"

As a rule, the career goal of academia demands a lot: the willingness to bounce from fixed-term contract to fixed-term contract over many years with a modest salary, a very high degree of flexibility including relocations, unpaid overtime in a grueling workday between teaching, supporting the respective professor, and doing one's own research.

 

Universities offer few prospects

A special legal regulation (WissZeitVG) allows doctoral candidates and postdocs to be employed on a fixed-term basis for longer than other professional groups: 6 years during the doctorate and 6 more years as a postdoc. This is justified by the scientific qualifications they acquire in the course of their work.

Things like family planning or the purchase of an apartment, which many tackle in their thirties, therefore often remain a gamble for scientists of the same age.

The prospects of ultimately obtaining a permanent contract at the university are rather poor in all this. In purely mathematical terms, the dream of a professorship can only come true for about 1 in 10 postdocs. Permanent positions below the professorship are even rarer. This is because research is predominantly financed by temporary third-party funds.

 

Formulations from explanatory video seem like mockery for many

"Those who get involved in all this usually do it out of love for science," said Frener. "But you do get the impression that our love is being exploited to some extent. In every generation, you find people who are enthusiastic. So why change anything about the system? It is precisely this attitude that is also expressed in the explanatory video of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research. I think many people resent this. The economy is in a state of permanent change, and it's only at the time-honored universities that outdated structures remain in place. That can be frustrating."

In fact, the criticism of the video is not just directed at the content, but above all at the tone of some of the formulations. Regarding the justification of the WissZeitVG, the video states, for example:

"To ensure that subsequent scientists also have the chance to acquire [...] qualifications and that one generation does not clog up all the positions, universities and research institutions are allowed to conclude fixed-term contracts in accordance with the special regulations of the WissZeitVG. This is how fluctuation occurs and it promotes innovation."

The BMBF has taken the video offline in response to the shitstorm. It is currently available on YouTube.

 

Complex initial situation

The fact that temporary qualification positions are necessary is not fundamentally doubted by most actors in the "I am Hanna" debate. On the other hand, it seems questionable to many that scientists in their 40s are still considered "young scientists." One thing that postdocs who have been working at the university for longer certainly don't want is to be seen as people who "clog up" the system.

This is also the opinion of Hohenheim postdoc Dr. Marc Cotter: "Postdocs do a lot for the university, for example when it comes to acquiring third-party funds. We contribute our experience and our international networks to the university and make a very significant contribution to keeping things running. To write off our work as 'qualification' alone seems dishonest to me. We deserve more recognition and more perspectives. That universities can afford the permanent brain drain amazes me to this day."

The equation "high competitive pressure = high innovative power" also doesn't add up in Regine Frener's opinion: "Even in psychology studies, you learn: uncertainty and fear are not good motivators. No one is demanding that all doctoral candidates be offered permanent positions at the university. But the competitive pressure is already absurdly high. A little more perspective on staying - especially below the professorial level: that would already improve the situation considerably."

 

Hohenheim LIVE on the topic of fixed-term contracts

The "I am Hanna" debate is primarily aimed at political change. Because the fault obviously lies in the system. But what exactly would these changes actually have to look like? And how can they be achieved? At the same time, however, the universities have to face the question of whether they are really exhausting all their possibilities to get the best out of doctoral candidates and postdocs.

What does this look like at the University of Hohenheim? And: What room for maneuver do the universities actually have? University President Stephan Dabbert wants to discuss this with university members as part of the Zoom series "Hohenheim LIVE." The event on October 4 (11:30 a.m. - 1 p.m.) is therefore dedicated to the topic of fixed-term contracts as the mid-level faculty and the "I am Hanna" debate.

Dr. Cotter sees starting points for improvement: "The longer you struggle through university in the hope of possibly still getting a permanent position, the more difficult it is to change to a completely different field of activity. It's not easy to find the right moment to jump ship, because you've actually already found your dream job. I have already experienced several times among my colleagues how dramatically this can turn out at the end of the maximum possible fixed-term period. On the part of the University Administration, I would like to see more tact in this difficult phase, greater transparency, and a willingness to really look for the best possible solution for each individual case."

Regine Frener's experience at Hohenheim has been mostly positive: "Personally, I think that a lot depends on the respective department. I myself have been very lucky in this respect, because I receive comprehensive support from the head of my department and we talk completely openly about all framework conditions and perspectives. But that is certainly not the case to the same extent everywhere. Central support services such as the Hohenheim Graduate Academy are therefore very important and should also be continuously developed. In other respects, too, the university would do well to pay more attention to the perspectives of doctoral candidates and postdocs. As a member of the Senate, I want to make a contribution to this."

Text: Leonhardmair / Translation: Neudorfer