Zoom Image

Bettina Stark-Watzinger (FDP), Federal Minister of Education and Research

Photograph:

Clemens Bilan / EPA

Bettina Stark-Watzinger does not hide her disappointment: The new edition of the Fixed-Term Contract Act (WissZeitVG), eagerly awaited by the research world for weeks, will probably come later than hoped. According to the FDP Federal Minister for Education and Research, the SPD and the Greens have decided against a conclusion at this point in time despite "good negotiations". According to Stark-Watzinger, the paper now presented is therefore expressly a draft bill from her ministry – not one of the traffic light coalition.

In the spring, the ministry had already presented key points for the amendment, but had cashed them in after only 51 hours after fierce protests on social media. The paper should be "back to the assembly hall," was the wording at the time. This was followed by a discussion in which State Secretary Jens Brandenburg sat down with two dozen representatives from universities, trade unions and non-university research institutions at a large table in the ministry to have the various points of view presented. The event was broadcast live online.

In spring 2024 in the Bundestag

More on the subject

  • President of the German Rectors' Conference: "Careers are being cut off"An interview by Miriam Olbrisch

  • Criticism of the Fixed-Term Contract Act at universities: "Hardly acceptable working conditions threaten to deteriorate further"

  • Working conditions in science:I was HannaBy Kristin Haug

It was not only in this round that it became clear how different the ideas of scientists on the one hand and their employers on the other are. With the draft bill now presented, according to Brandenburg, the ministry has succeeded in achieving a "good balance between the positions". However, Stark-Watzinger also made it clear that the amendment does not solve other central problems in the working environment of science: "The Fixed-Term Contract Act does not create permanent positions and does not establish a modern management culture in universities."

The draft is now being coordinated with the other ministries, Stark-Watzinger continued, and will also be discussed with the federal states. Immediately after the summer break, the cabinet is to deal with it, after which the draft will go to parliament. According to the current state of planning, the law could be passed in the Bundestag in spring 2024.

The most important points of the draft at a glance:

  • Probably the most controversial point: How long should the so-called postdoc phase last – i.e. the time after completing a doctorate, during which scientists conduct research on their own projects in order to recommend themselves for a professorship? The draft provides for a "4+2" model: After four years with a fixed-term employment contract, a further fixed-term contract is only possible if the researchers subsequently receive a permanent position. Previously, there was a maximum fixed-term period of six years. The SPD, trade unions and the alliance #ichbinhanna had demanded an upper limit of two years.

  • In the future, there will be a lower limit for the duration of initial contracts so that doctoral students do not have to move from one short-term employment relationship to the next: it should be at least three years. After the doctorate, the lower limit is two years.

    • Something is also to change for student assistants: In the future, their employment contracts will run for at least one year and a maximum of eight years, up from an upper limit of six years. It is important, said Stark-Watzinger, that students do not have to fear losing their part-time job in the final phase of their studies.

    Praise from the FDP, criticism from the #ichbinhanna movement

    "We are putting an end to the time of the long delay of young scientists and obliging universities to show career prospects at an early stage," praised Stephan Seiter, research policy spokesman for the FDP parliamentary group in the Bundestag and party colleague of the minister. Not everyone shares this assessment.

    Amrei Bahr, spokesman for the #ichbinhanna movement, which fights for better working conditions in science, sharply criticized the draft: "It's unbelievable that you have learned NIX from 2 years of discussion and would rather ruin science location D," the junior professor wrote on Twitter. Bahr's comrade-in-arms, the literary scholar Kristin Eichhorn, saw in the draft "rather cosmetic changes. This is a sham reform, just like the last one."

    "We regret that we do not yet have a final result despite the already very long negotiations," comments Nina Stahr, spokeswoman for education, research and technology assessment of the Green parliamentary group. "But the last proposal of the BMBF was not yet able to reach a consensus for us Alliance Greens." Her party was concerned that the follow-up commitment in the postdoc phase would really create security and predictability without increasing the pressure on scientists.

    "The follow-up commitment as an option after four years comes much too late," criticized the deputy GEW chairman and university expert Andreas Keller on Twitter. The ministry had followed the position of the employers' side with the draft.