Faculty Board Column: Questions and Answers
There was no shortage of smart questions during the recent information sessions. The meetings, in which the Faculty Board provided an update on the faculty's current situation and did its best to address concerns and questions, were well attended. Attendees posed important questions and contributed valuable ideas for potential solutions. We greatly appreciate the engagement and commitment shown by everyone.
Particular questions were raised multiple times. To ensure everyone—including those who were unable to attend—stays informed, we’ve summarised answers to the most frequently asked questions below. More detailed responses to various topics will be added to the Q&A on the Perspective 2028 page.
1. How does the principle of solidarity work?
At Leiden University, the principle of solidarity is embedded in the financial allocation model. Thanks to this model, our faculty receives significant support due to its unique position. Unlike other Leiden faculties, we offer many programmes that enhance the university's reputation but often attract smaller student numbers. As a result, we receive a relatively larger share of the university’s fixed funding allocation.
Additionally, many of our students pursue a second degree, for which the university receives no government funding. However, we do receive compensation for these students through EC-based funding.
The Executive Board acknowledges that within the university our faculty is currently facing the greatest budget cuts while also being of great importance to Leiden. They have emphasised that maintaining strong humanities programmes will require ongoing solidarity at the university level.
The solidarity principle also applies within our faculty. Financially stronger institutes and programmes with more students indirectly support those facing more challenges or fewer enrolments. This solidarity is in the form of the shared faculty reserve. All programmes, including those with high enrolments, will need to adjust the range of programmes they offer to create a more efficient educational portfolio.
2. When will there be more clarity about the impact on staff?
We had hoped to provide clarity about potential steps towards a reorganisation and the impact on staff by the end of 2024. Unfortunately, this is not yet possible. The process is complex and depends on several external factors, such as government policies and developments at sister faculties.
Our priority is to exercise meticulous care. Only when we have had the plans for adjustments to the educational portfolio, including the advice of the programme chairs, worked out in detail will we be able to make decisions about the future educational portfolio. We expect to submit a request for advice to the Faculty Council in February 2025. We do not anticipate a decision on whether to proceed with a reorganisation until the spring of 2025 at the earliest.
In the meantime, the budget cuts from The Hague, whose full impact is still unclear, loom over us. We are, of course, aware that this prolonged uncertainty is difficult to handle, and we very much appreciate your patience and understanding.
3. What rights do (international) staff members have?
Whenever the word ‘reorganisation’ is mentioned, the first question is: what does this mean for our jobs? While it is too early to consider individual cases, we can address concerns raised several times by a number of international staff members: Are staff who are unable to teach in Dutch at a disadvantage under the Internationalisation in Balance (WIB) Act compared to colleagues who teach in Dutch? The answer is clear: No, they are not at a disadvantage. All staff at the Faculty of Humanities fall under the same Collective Labour Agreement (cao), which means that everyone has the same rights.
We understand that there is a growing need for information about the legal position. HR will therefore organise a session early next year to answer all your questions. More details will follow soon.
4. What is the Faculty Board doing to oppose the budget cuts?
We, as the Faculty Board, are not passively accepting the cuts to humanities funding. We are in constant discussion with the Executive Board and the other faculties. Within our faculty, we are looking at where contributions to central university costs can be reduced as well as exploring other possible solutions.
At the same time, the Executive Board is holding talks behind the scenes with Universities of the Netherlands (UNL) and the Ministry of Education, Culture, and Science (OCW) to address these national budget cuts. Lobbying is in full swing. The importance of the humanities is a key factor in all these discussions.
The question of whether we might resort to being ‘administratively non-compliant’ and simply refuse to implement cuts has also been considered. However, the harsh reality is that we could carry on for another two years, but at the end of that time our reserves would be exhausted. We are therefore taking responsibility now to avoid such a scenario. At the same time, we are continuing to advocate against the cuts.
One important final remark: time is on our side. Although the financial outlook remains grave, the budget for next year is slightly better than previously expected, which gives us a glimmer of hope. This suggests that the savings implemented by institutes and the faculty office are beginning to have an effect. Even so, further cuts will still be necessary to achieve long-term stability.
We understand that this summary addresses only a fraction of your questions and concerns. A more comprehensive list of questions and answers is available and will be regularly updated on the Perspective 2028 webpage. Some questions remain unanswered for now—not because we want to avoid them, but because the answers are still being finalised. We encourage you to continue asking questions and voicing your concerns.
We remain committed to fostering open dialogue and maintaining transparent communication.
The Faculty Board,
Mark Rutgers
Mirjam de Baar
Jeroen Touwen
Saskia Goedhard
Nova Verkerk