FAQ

Questions and answers about LIFE’s budget 2011

-for the latest questions and answers, please see bottom of page.

 

LIFE is unfortunately facing large cutbacks in 2011. To respond to many of the questions that students and staff at LIFE may have in this connection, LIFE’s Management has tried to address a number of the issues many students and staff may worry about at the moment. Some of the questions can be answered accurately now, while it may not be possible to answer others fully until after the cost reductions have been implemented. In the coming weeks, we will update the list of questions and answers on a continuous basis. Everybody is welcome to send us questions about the cost cuts. New questions and answers will be communicated through eLIFE.

 

This year LIFE has received a great number of applications for our study programmes. And in recent years, LIFE has attracted more and more research grants subject to competition. So why do we have to cut back now?

Generally, there are five reasons for that:

   Firstly, the Government has decided earlier that Danish universities must reduce administration costs by DKK 250 mill in the period 2010 to 2013. University of Copenhagen’s share of this is DKK 80 mill, of which LIFE must cut back DKK 21 mill. This Government demand is the first and most important reason why we have to make cost reductions.

   Another reason is that LIFE must co-finance the coming years’ building plans, at Frederiksberg Campus as well as in other parts of the University. This involves a total budget cut of DKK 9.6 mill in the years till 2013.

   A third reason is that the number of staff at LIFE has grown. This is the case even if a large number of jobs were cut earlier this year and almost 50 members of staff were dismissed. In particular, far more PhD students have been employed in recent years. The additional members of staff mean that every year we have to set aside 3.6 mill extra to be able to live up to our holiday pay obligation.

   A fourth reason is that in 2010 we have encouraged our departments to be extra cautious about spending money. We have done this to generally reduce LIFE’s deficit in 2010. This has meant that some departments have build up a surplus in 2010 which we have then been able to use to cover deficits elsewhere. The departments which have not spent all their money from the 2010 budget should however, be given the opportunity to spend it in 2011. But as their surplus from 2010 has already been spent elsewhere at LIFE, this means that we will have to make cutbacks in 2011 to pay back the money to the departments in question.

   Finally – fifthly – we in LIFE’s Management wish to make it a priority that funding is available for strategic scientific/academic purposes in the management pool, for instance to enable us to support the elite research areas at LIFE. But other important needs might also arise during the year which we are not able to foresee now. With the cost reduction plan that we have now, money will not be available for these purposes until in 2012 at the earliest. And this will only be the case if we are not hit by further budget cuts.

What are the total cost reductions at LIFE?

The total cost reductions at LIFE amount to DKK 48 mill. But even if we implement the full cost reduction plan in the beginning of 2011, we will only save 24 mill. This is in particular due to payroll costs in the notice period. The full effect of the cost reduction will not be seen until 2012.

Does this mean that we will be able to look forward to greater financial latitude in 2012 when we will have the full effect of the cutbacks that we are carrying out now?

All things being equal, we will have greater latitude in 2012 than we have in 2011. We can, however, not be completely certain. As part of its Budget agreement, the Government passed cutbacks of DKK 225 mill in each of the years 2011, 2012 and 2013. In relation to 2011, a solution has been found so that the reduction will only be felt to a lesser extent. Until now no solutions have been found for 2012 and 2013. This means that we may be hit by extra cost reductions in 2012 and 2013. We, therefore, have no guarantee that we will have extra latitude in 2012 and 2013.

 

 

The Government demands that we carry out the administrative cost reductions over three years. Why does LIFE choose to carry out the entire cost reduction all at once and as quickly as possible?

We know what the cost reduction targets are for the period and therefore make a total plan. By carrying out one big cost reduction exercise now, we try to avoid being subjected to repeated large cost-cutting rounds in the coming years. This of course provides no guarantees, but then we have tried to do what we can to avoid repeated cost reductions.

 

Will the savings be found in payroll costs or can they be found in other areas as well?

The cuts will primarily be made to payroll costs but the departments are working on finding concrete areas where costs may also be cut, for instance operating costs. After the departments have reported back to the Management regarding their cost reduction targets on 7 and 8 December 2010, it will be possible to say more about how the overall cost reductions will be implemented.

 

How many members of staff will end up losing their job?

At the present time, it has not been finally decided how the cost reductions will be implemented. Therefore, we do not know yet how many members of staff will have to be dismissed and how much money can be found in other ways. But we will get an overview of the situation in the course of the next month.

 

How are the cost reductions distributed at LIFE – and why are they distributed like that?

The Management at LIFE has held meetings with all LIFE’s heads of department, where overall targets have been set for the cost reductions at the individual departments as well as in Faculty Services, the Library and Campus Services. All departments and units will have to cut costs, but the size of the savings has been distributed in a way that takes into consideration the departments that generate the highest income from student FTEs and attract most external funding. Additionally, the distribution is subject to the Management’s estimate of each department. You can read more about the distribution here.

 

Who will be dismissed?

No decision has been made on who is going to be dismissed. But at least half of the savings will come from reducing technical and administrative staff in order for us to live up to the Government’s cost reduction targets. But with a cost reduction of the order mentioned, scientific staff will probably also have to be dismissed. When members of staff are proposed for redundancy dismissals in connection with cutbacks such as this, the Faculty Collaboration Committee (FSU) carries out a thorough discussion on the basis of a number of criteria that has been laid down by FSU and LIFE’s Management before the final decisions are taken by Management.

 

Have LIFE’s departments been instructed to dismiss technical and administrative staff only when meeting their cost reduction targets ?

No – the departments have been asked to draw up a comprehensive plan for the implementation of the cost reduction targets announced which the heads of department must submit to the Management no later than 7 and 8 December 2010.

 

Are you “protected” if your job is externally funded?

External funds will almost always be earmarked for a specific purpose. They are, however, not always earmarked for specific persons. You can, therefore, be dismissed even if you are employed in an externally financed project – also even if the project continues.

 

What is the help offered to the members of staff who are dismissed?

It is discussed centrally at the University at the moment if so-called outplacement programmes can be offered to the members of staff who are dismissed. Outplacement consists of independent career guidance, advice on CV, job applications, job interviews, etc

 

It will still be possible to make use of the University’s agreement with the company Prescriba where members of staff will be given free psychological counselling and other expert consultancy services on for instance finances and law.

 

A CV database will be set up, in which dismissed members of staff may enter their CV and indicate which type of positions they are interested in. After the cost-cutting round, a search for suitable candidates should be made in the database before a job is advertised.

 

Has the process been coordinated with University of Copenhagen (KU) and the General Collaboration Committee (HSU)?

KU’s personnel section has stated that HSU’s role is primarily to be informed but that the processes take place at faculty and departments wher the Faculty Collaboration Committee (FSU) and the Local Collaboration Committees (LSU) will be actively involved.

Will there be a special allocation of money for severance programmes?

At last year’s cost-cutting round, the Board of University of Copenhagen allocated money for general severance agreements. This will not be the case this year. If you are over 60 years, a severance agreement can be made individually.

 

Which parts of our research will be affected by the cutbacks and how?

This will not be finally clear until in the new year. But on the face of it, it can be expected that the research areas that publish, teach and disseminate the most and generate most external funding will, all things being equal, also be the ones least affected by the cost-cutting round.

 

Which study programmes will be affected by the cutbacks and how?

This will not be finally clear until in the new year. But the ambition is that at least no compulsory courses will be cut. Conversely, the cost reductions will probably mean that in a number of areas, there will no longer be quite as many elective courses as there are today.

 

How will the cutbacks affect LIFE’s business collaboration?

LIFE has a strategy for business collaboration, and we will continue to follow that strategy even though we may, naturally, have to adjust a few areas after the cost-cutting round.

 

When and how will the Management be able to assess the consequences of the cutbacks?

As soon as the Management receives reports back from the departments about their concrete cost reduction targets, the Management will be able to start assessing the consequences of the cost reductions. The departments report back on 7 and 8 December, and the Management will subsequently have meetings with the Heads of Department. But realistically, we will not be able to announce exactly what the consequences of the cost reductions will be until in the new year. Generally, we will communicate developments in eLIFE. Precisely when and how we will announce the cuts, you will be able to read in eLIFE.

 

Is there still a risk that LIFE will be ordered to carry out further administrative cost reductions in the coming years, when we implement these administrative cost reductions already now?

It is not possible to say what the consequences of the coming years’ budgets will be for LIFE. Right now we are acting on the knowledge we have about cost reduction targets for the coming three years.

 

A number of disciplines at LIFE possibly face merger with disciplines in other faculties in the coming year. Do they not risk first being hit by cost reductions here at LIFE and afterwards, after having been moved to another faculty, being hit by yet another budget cut?

This is a relevant consideration, even though at the moment it does seem a bit hypothetical. One of the reasons being that right now it looks as if SCIENCE can expect a surplus in 2011. But nevertheless, the Management will of course be alert to exactly this issue in the coming time. And we will take it up in University of Copenhagen fora where it makes sense.

 

In the last half of 2010, there has been a qualified hiring freeze all over LIFE. Will this stop now or will it continue into 2011?

At the present moment, University of Copenhagen has not announced any hiring freeze for 2011. But in temporal relation to the dismissals staff will of course not be hired to perform duties that could have been performed by some of those who have been dismissed. However, we will continue to hire many PhDs - also in the beginning of 2011 – in order for us to live up to our targets in the development contract, among other things.

 

What does the cost reduction process look like?

A timetable for the process has been drawn up which you can read here

 

What is the reason why LIFE’s Management wants to build up a management pool for strategic purposes when this costs jobs?

In a time with decreasing basic funding, it may be of decisive importance to have strategic liberty of action and management. It may, for instance, be necessary to have resources that you can mobilize if you need to land a very large external grant. But there may also be a number of other examples where a management pool may benefit the entire faculty in the long term. This said, we cannot yet be quite certain that we will actually manage to have funds in the management pool in 2012.

 

It has been mentioned earlier that the elite research areas at LIFE should be allocated more funds in the coming years. It may not be certain that the elite research areas will be given more funds from LIFE – maybe not in 2012 either, but if they do, how will this benefit LIFE generally?

If we succeed in allocating additional resources to the elite research areas, this will benefit us in several ways. With more resources we will better be able to attract researchers, PhD students and maybe also MSc students to our elite research areas. This will also help us increase the external financing from public and private sources and engage in national and international collaboration which can make a difference.

 

What do you do if you have more questions that you would like the Management to answer?

You are welcome to write to – in Danish or in English. Here we will bring new questions and answers as the situation becomes more clear.

 

25 November 2010:

 

Are the elite research areas at LIFE exempt from cutbacks and dismissals?

Basically, it is up to the departments to assess where, in overall terms, it will be best to make cost reductions. This means that a department may choose to propose cutbacks and efficiency measures in the elite research areas. However, the Faculty Management recommends that the elite research areas are exempt from cutbacks.

 

Does LIFE carry a disproportionately large part of the coming cutbacks? And if yes, why?

LIFE making a somewhat larger cost reduction than the other faculties at University of Copenhagen (KU) is because the Faculty Management has decided to carry out all the already known cutbacks for the coming three years as an overall plan.

 

LIFE’s basic grant will be reduced by DKK 33.6 mill. (link). To this should be added that already next year, the Faculty will need funds for paying back the department’s savings in 2010. This results in a total need for cutbacks of DKK 48 mill at LIFE. The cost reductions already appear from the Government’s Recovery Plan, the 2011 Budget and KU’s investment plans and budget. In the view of the Management, it is best to make an overall plan so that, as far as possible, we will avoid having to make a new plan each year.

 

Other faculties at the University have chosen to only focus on 2011. While one has made a plan for 2011-12 with consequent larger cost reductions.

 

Are the coming large cost reductions a price we pay for the merger with University of Copenhagen?

A merger requires investments and the fact that LIFE is now part of KU for instance requires new IT infrastructure, and LIFE is also co-financing large building projects which will benefit us. The merger with KU has led to constructive collaboration in the field of teaching and research and LIFE is also involved in two UNIK grants.

 

What has the Management at LIFE done to fight the large cost reductions?

Large parts of the cost reductions are related to the budget cuts that the Government requires the University to make. LIFE’s management has not been able to change much as regards the requirements that come directly from the Ministry.

LIFE has to cut DKK 48 mill. The DKK 21 mill. are cost reductions required by KU. The remaining millions will go to:

• Holiday pay, because we are more staff at LIFE (primarily PhDs)
• Reversal of surplus funding to departments
• Strategic scientific/academic purposes in the management pool and prioritisation of the elite research areas at LIFE.

University Post/Universitetsavisen writes that overall University of Copenhagen needs to cut 200 jobs - including 200 jobs at LIFE. Is this correct?

It has not yet been decided precisely how we are going to cut back at LIFE. The heads of department must draw up an overall plan for the implementation of the cost reduction targets announced. The plan will be discussed with the Faculty Management on 7 and 8 December at the latest.

 

Question and answer added on 30 November 2010:

 

What happens to PhD students if their principal supervisor is dismissed?

Changes to matters related to supervision for instance in connection with the dismissal of the supervisor will of course be discussed with the PhD student affected. Everything possible will be done to find a new principal supervisor and to provide support though relevant secondary supervisors. At the employment/enrolment of the PhD student in question, the department entered into an obligation to make resources, including resources for supervision, available to the PhD student. Therefore, the department must be creative and for instance let the “second most suitable” scientist at the department take over the principal supervision and possibly agree with another department/faculty/university/ (or possibly the academic member of staff dismissed) that they provide secondary supervision so that the obligation to provide supervision can be met in full. If in doubt, the department is welcome to ask Michael Cleve Hansen in Study and Students’ Affairs for assistance with changing the supervisory roles.

 

If all permanently employed staff invoice one or two months of project costs each year, would this be enough to secure funding for renewal?

It is correct that the cost reduction corresponds to 10 per cent of LIFE’s government allocation and thereby to invoicing one or two months’ pay. In practice, it is however not so simple as the external funding is not evenly distributed over the departments and as not all costs can be invoiced. It is, however, an important part of the departments’ possible ways of mitigating the effect of the cutbacks. Heads of department as well as collaboration committees encourage LIFE to use this possibility as much as possible.