Participation in decision-making at the UvA
Consensus and participation in decision-making
The UvA’s Executive Board works closely with the formal central representative advisory councils. In addition, an important role within the faculties is reserved for the faculty representative advisory councils and the boards of studies. Moreover, faculties and institutes lobby internal support for their own initiatives in many different ways.
The UvA is a decentralised university in which faculties and institutes organise education and research. This also means that UvA staff are accustomed to garnering support among colleagues and students for plans and changes. There is, of course, also a legally prescribed, extensive structure of formal participation in decision-making.
The way formal representation is organised
The UvA has two formal representative advisory bodies at a central level: the Central Works Council (COR) and the Central Student Council (CSR). Both take part in the Joint Meeting (GV). In addition to these central bodies, each of the UvA’s seven faculties also has its own faculty works council (OR) and faculty student council (FSR). The support services have their own body, the Joint Works Council for the Shared Service Units (GOR). Half of the members of the CSR are directly elected, and the rest are delegated by the faculty student councils. Eight members of the COR are chosen by indirect election and eight members are delegated by the various works councils. The term of office for the student councils is one year, and the term of office for the works councils three years.
The turnout percentage for the student council elections is on average 20-25 per cent, and for the works councils elections about 55 per cent (with great variation between different parts of the organisation).
A variety of meetings regularly take place between the Executive Board and the COR and CSR. Informal and formal meetings take place between the rector magnificus and the CSR, as well as between the president of the Executive Board and the COR. If needed, a joint meeting is held with the GV. Furthermore, a meeting is held twice a year with both councils on currents issues at play within the UvA and about the issue of collaboration with the CvB. The COR and CSR also have two meetings a year with the Supervisory Board. All formal meetings are open to the public.
At the various faculties, additional regulations have been established for specific matters and the role of the faculty student council (FSR) and works council (OR) therein. Examples include the right to be consulted about the budget plan, educational policy, joint partnerships, the minors and electives that are offered, the teaching and examinations regulations, and the appointment of executive staff.
Right of consultation and right of consent
The Higher Education and Research Act (WHW) outlines the rights of consultation and consent for representative advisory bodies at universities and universities of applied sciences. The Works Council Act (WOR) also outlines specific rights of consent and consultation for the works councils concerning decisions that directly affect staff. The legal procedure for both acts has been formalised in the event of a negative recommendation being issued or support being withheld for a proposed measure. A negative recommendation or a decision to withhold consent cannot simply be ignored by the CvB or the deans.
The Study Loan Act has determined that the GV has a right of consent with respect to the main features of the budget. It is up to the CvB, in consultation with the advisory bodies, to determine what falls within this ambit and whether this also includes the allocation model.
Boards of studies and councils
The active input of researchers and students forms the foundation on which the academic community stands. The UvA therefore attaches great importance to the proper functioning of the boards of studies (BoS). Boards of Studies are one half composed of students from the respective programme and one half of lecturers. The BoS decides on the direction and content of the programme and therefore plays an important part in safeguarding the quality of teaching and education. In addition to the legally enshrined responsibilities, the UvA has explicitly determined within its university regulations that the boards of studies have an advisory role with regard to the quality of programmes. Operating within the faculties are also advisory councils of Colleges and Graduate Schools in which experts from outside the university can have a seat. The research schools are represented in the faculty research councils.
The Rector Magnificus is in direct contact with a number of advisory committees: the University Committee on Research (UOC), the University Committee on Education (UCO), the Senate and the University of Amsterdam Ethics Committee (AIEC). Representatives of the Central Works Council (COR) and Central Student Council (CSR) take part in the AIEC, and students also have a seat in the UOC.
Participation in decision-making and consultation with respect to Profile 2016
Consent and consultation go way beyond these formal structures. Exactly how this is organised depends to a large extent on the kind of dossier and the subject. In everyday practice, specific working groups are formed regularly. For issues with a greater impact, this is extensively done.
For instance, staff and students were involved at regular intervals during the formulation of the first draft of the Faculty of Humanities’ much-talked-about Profile 2016 policy document. Throughout December, January and February, many meetings took place between faculty management and the faculty student council, works council, the Graduate School board, faculty administrators, the research council, the faculty council of department chairs, the College of Humanities council, as well as various professors and programme directors. Approximately 300 people were involved in these meetings. Moreover, between December and January eight work groups comprised of students and staff were at work, while in December an online discussion platform – a joint initiative of the faculty student council, works council and faculty - was created for all those involved.
Modernising participation in decision-making
In a statement issued on 4 March, 2015, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) stated that dialogue and discussion, formal and informal, form an integral part of the academic community. Councils and committees have been formed at different levels within the institution in which all sections of the university are represented. In principle, participation in decision-making is well enshrined, but can be improved in practice within each institute. It has been observed that the same level of interest to flesh out these positions doesn’t exist in equal measure everywhere, and that not all students and staff feel sufficiently consulted in important matters within the university.
The University of Amsterdam agrees. It is absolutely clear that irrespective of just how extensive the structure of formal and informal consultation is within the UvA, not everyone feels represented.