NSC Member of Parliament talks about social safety at TU Delft

Hertzberger, a TU Delft alumnus, was on campus as an NSC coalition party spokesperson for higher education and academia. She is one of the members of the House of Representatives that regularly brings the subjects of social safety and the freedom of the press to the attention of Eppo Bruins, the Minister of Education.

To hear firsthand what the issues are at TU Delft, she talked to various people, including representatives from the Students and Staff for Safety pressure group, Delta’s Editor in Chief, Saskia Bonger, and the Chair of the Works Council, Ronald Kuil. She was given a tour of The Green Village and had discussions with representatives from the Education and Student Affairs Department and the Innovation and Impact Centre (I&IC). She also briefly spoke to the Rector Magnificus and Executive Board Chair Tim van der Hagen. They were ‘powerful discussions’ Hertzberger emailed a couple of days later, that she would ‘bring to The Hague’.

Displeasure

Students and Staff for Safety informed the Member of Parliament about what had happened at I&IC. ‘One issue covered was that the Executive Board had threatened staff members with dismissal, to force them into silence about the change of management at I&IC’, she emailed when asked.

The pressure group also expressed its displeasure about the state of affairs around the Inspectorate of Education’s report that was published on 1 March. The Executive Board’s response at the time was to take the Inspectorate to court, which the pressure group believes must have cost a lot of money given the hiring of external specialists. After much protest, including from Students and Staff for Safety, the Executive Board withdrew the plan. What still disturbs the pressure group is that the Supervisory Board supported the Executive Board in its intention to sue the Inspectorate.

Students and Staff for Safety also told Hertzberger ‘that for years it was normal practice to transfer (or dismiss) the people who reported the lack of social safety while the people who had caused unsafe situations were often not dealt with and could simply stay in their positions’.

Fragmented

The OR Chair Ronald Kuil also sounded critical a couple of days after his meeting with Hertzberger. In his ‘social safety update’ on the intranet he wrote that a lot of employees are wondering what the status is. He writes that the representation bodies do not know for certain as, while Kuil says that they have the right of consent for new regulations, the OR has not yet seen any documents.

Kuil writes that the main missing element is an ‘an integral plan of approach in which all facets of social safety are named’ and that ‘The current approach is too fragmented, making it far from clear what initiatives contribute to the desired situation. Working on social safety requires a clear programmatic approach instead of the currently chosen ad hoc approach: after all, it is about culture change’. He believes that an integrated plan would give employees a better idea about future initiatives and would create the ‘necessary support in the organization’.

The OR believes that an integrated action plan would help create ‘a safe culture of interaction’ and ‘a safe organisational structure’. It would also ‘grow a good support system with safeguarding mechanisms’, and lead to ‘stronger involvement and better supervision of the Supervisory Board in the topic of social safety and better direction from the top layer of the university (CvB, deans, directors)’.  To the OR, there is ‘no reason whatsoever’ not to arrange this in the ‘very near future’, as the information needed is already available.

Countervailing power

Hertzberger writes that TU Delft must be a pleasant place to work. ‘Unfortunately, university is a place that is sensitive to problems given the long-term dependence, the hierarchy and the intrinsic passion that people have for working in science.’ She believes that social safety is ‘rightly on the political agenda’.

She also believes that universities should be ‘an independent and strong support structure for the state’. “The countervailing power in institutions needs to stand firm and function well. The representation bodies, the Supervisory Board and the independent press are indispensable.’ The Member of Parliament said that the NSC will work on strengthening the countervailing power. She writes that she can as yet not state any clear actions.

House of Representatives debate

She has taken some actions though. During a House of Representatives debate (in Dutch) on 23 October, she asked Minister Bruins directly if the independence of higher education media should not be incorporated in law. She also discussed this with the Editor in Chief of Delta on 1 November. Hertzberger had the support of Beckerman, an SP party Member of Parliament, but Bruins kept the issue at bay, as his predecessors had done, saying “It is a big step to take at the moment”. He did however emphasise the “importance of independent journalism for democracy and the state. “I do see it, but I will first discuss it and go deeper into the subject, and you will then hear my findings.”

During the House of Representatives debate, Bruins emphasised that the situation at TU Delft is ‘very worrying’ to him. This was why he had had a meeting with the Supervisory Board in July, and had had contact with the Supervisory Board Chair Tijo Collot d’Escury in connection with Delta’s investigative article that was published in October. In the article, 24 current and former staff members told about their experiences with the lack of social safety. “I am following developments closely,” Bruins told the House of Representatives. He said that he could intervene, but will not yet do so. The Inspectorate will assess the situation in February and this will be the ‘benchmark’ for him. “There must then be a clear, measurable improvement.”