On average about one in five of all university employees complain about high pressure at work. Lecturers (UD and UHD) score slightly higher. From them more than a quarter (27%) think that the work pressure is too high, as shown by numbers collected from inquiries at a number of universities by the Tilburg research institute IVA.
On the face of it these are not shocking numbers. There are sectors in the business world where over one-third of personnel complains of high pressure at work. Seen in this light the IVA calls the situation at the universities 'not alarming'.
The unions see this differently. 'If this many members of staff have problems with pressure at work, we do take that seriously', Ms. J.C. Waaijenberg from the CMHF says. Her colleague Arno Lammeretz from the AbvaKabo also does not think it relevant that the pressure at work is even higher outside universities. 'If a dam breaks, you do not check whether the water is even higher elsewhere. We have a problem. So we have to take measures.'
In a first round of the national negotiations for the collective labour agreement (CAO) the unions have discussed the IVA report with the universities. The Association of Universities (VSNU) proved to feel little for national agreements. 'Pressure at work should be tackled at the relevant location', according to spokesman Jeroen Sparla. 'And with measures that fit the situation. We prefer to aim rather than produce a shower of shot.'
The unions also realise that the problems of pressure at work are diverse, and cannot be cured with one national miracle-measure. 'But we have to give the local bodies the necessary instruments', Lammeretz of the AbvaKabo argues.
As a start he wants to improve the research into pressure at work. 'Every university conducts their own inquiries with changing questionnaires', according to Lammeretz. 'That makes the picture less than reliable, and also makes it difficult to chart the improvements later on.' He therefore feels that the VBBA-questionnaires common in other sectors should be made compulsory for all universities. The nature and size of the problems changes from faculty to faculty and from personnel category to personnel category the report shows. Low-ranking personnel often complain of lack of influence and about the consequences of cutbacks. Scientific personnel usually miss career perspectives.
Lammeretz does feel able to point to a common problem: in many places sufficient progress discussions and performance interviews are missing. He talks of a 'lack of professional management, of academic leadership'. A large part of the pressure at work that people experience can supposedly be traced back to this.
Mid January the CAO-negotiators continue their discussions. The unions will again argue for national agreements to help reduce pressure at work.
