Manifesto against experiment with promotional education presented to the House of Representatives

Today (February 4, 1:45 PM), grant-based PhD students from the University of Groningen (RUG) are presenting their manifesto against the PhD Scholarship Program experiment to the House of Representatives. Grant-based PhD students do exactly the same work as employed PhD students, but for less money and under poorer employment conditions. For example, the RUG promised grant-based PhD students more freedom in designing their projects, but in practice, this freedom did not differ from that of employed PhD students. Grant-based PhD students were also reportedly not allowed to teach, although in some cases their supervisors explicitly encouraged them to do so.

In this manifesto, the PhD scholarship candidates demand the end of the PhD Scholarship Program experiment, employee status, and compensation for the time they worked as PhD scholarship candidates. The manifesto is supported by 1,075 individual supporters, 239 of whom are PhD scholarship candidates from the University of Groningen, and national organizations such as the PhD Network Netherlands (PhDN), (student) unions, and WOinActie.

The PhD Scholarship experiment began in 2016 and was controversial even before its inception. Although the ( not undisputed ) interim evaluation of the experiment indicates no adverse effects, the PhD scholarship students themselves are sending a much more negative message. In addition to the 239 PhD scholarship students who signed this critical manifesto, 58 medical scholarship PhD students have gone to court to demand employee status , and other PhD scholarship students are considering taking the same step.

The University of Groningen has applied for an additional 650 grant-based PhD candidates for the second round of the experiment , in addition to the current 850. This is despite fierce criticism from the University Council . However, two faculties have already announced that they will no longer participate in the experiment: the Faculty of Law determined that there was insufficient difference in work between grant-based PhD candidates and employed PhD candidates to justify a difference in employment conditions, and the Faculty of Philosophy considers two types of PhD candidates undesirable. In light of these developments, the presentation of the manifesto is an opportune moment for Parliament to thoroughly reconsider the experiment.