Avoiding a Caporetto of Research

In the indifference of many and the silence of too many, in the coming months (if not weeks) a number between 7,000 and 10,000 young and very young researchers will have no chance of remaining in the Italian public research system . To these are added thousands of new research doctors who will be expelled before even entering. The research of those who have taken their first steps will stop . Recruitment with Airc funds, the pride of the country, will be impossible . The Italian winners of European consortia "Marie Curie Doctoral Network", aimed at recruiting research doctorates, will have to return the resources assigned.

The reasons for this nightmare? A recruitment reform made three years ago with zero euros, operational since the beginning of this year, which introduced the Research Contract (Cdr) as the only available instrument, and which, although animated by noble intentions, puts a tombstone on the future of research in this country .

The Cdr is presented by those who promoted and supported it as a tool to overcome the "precarious" condition of the research sector. A statement, in my opinion, totally misleading as also observed by Prof. Antonio Graziosi, right in the Foglio . Precarious is he or she who, having achieved continuous, stable and complete training, does not have access to stabilization opportunities. But here we are talking about young people who want to understand if that is their path: years in which the CV is consolidated, ranging through experiences and research activities in a progressive professionalization and specialization, an essential prerequisite for subsequent stabilization paths as - in the University - tenure-track researchers (Rtt). Nor can we speak of this period (and the related reform) as protection of the "pre-role". Not only because it is inevitable that not all those who enter universities or research institutions for a few years after their doctorate, want or have the solidity to stay there. But also because the CdR is not “pre” of any “role” and does not guarantee access to a university role, indeed the law – perhaps few people know – expressly excludes it.

But even if we wanted to go along with these narratives, we must ask ourselves how the new CdR intends to “eliminate precariousness”. The answer is disconcerting: by halving the entry-level research positions available to young people who complete their PhD. The numbers do not lie and are public. They have been written down in black and white since 2022 in the technical report of the general accounting office of the state to the maxi amendment to the law converting the Pnrr 2 decree that introduced the new CdR. The report states that “the increase in the unit cost of the contract [compared to the old research grants, ed.] will lead to a reduction in the number of fundable contracts”. And that, compared to the 13,000 research grant holders in service at universities (2022 data) “with the entry into force of the provision [of the CdR], with equal resources this amount would be reduced over time, until reaching the number of approximately 6-7,000 units”. In other words, "precariousness" is eliminated by halving the number of young people who will do research. But that's not all, from the proponents' report it emerges that the ab-initio elimination of the many young people who want to become professionals by approaching the world of research is exactly the intention of the CdR which, "costing more", will contribute to "a more precise and functional channeling of resources, also in order to reduce the pressure for further regulatory interventions aimed at stabilizing the subjects who have enjoyed such contracts". Not only, therefore, are precarious workers halved but also the problems of stabilization.

The State Accounting Office numbers, however, refer to 2022. Today, the number of young people with research grants has almost doubled. In fact, driven by the PNRR, universities and institutions were told: “Recruit young people”. Today, with the “cutting of precarious workers” law (and not precarious employment), the opposite is being done. A real “system” Caporetto for which someone will have to take responsibility. In this context, it should also be remembered that the vast majority of those who were recruited with research grants after their doctorate, that is, in the order of approximately 11,500 units out of 13,000, were financed by competitive funds, national or international, or by private funds. This aspect – which seems unknown to the fathers of the CdR – means that, even if new public resources were allocated to the CdR, which has a gross cost almost double that of the research grant for an identical net, these would only affect 10 percent of the beneficiaries.

Among the further serious limitations of the Research Contract (a term already inappropriate for the academy), there is the drastic reduction of the autonomy of the young person, tied to the execution of the project of the manager; the impossibility of participating with one's own name in calls for young people independently; the inusability - already mentioned - of the CdR to hire young people with AIRC funds, in Marie Curie consortia, or in ministerial Prin projects, in the latter case also given the limited capacity of the funds allocated. Added to all this is an unacceptable paradox: the CdR is subject to a taxation similar to that of a subordinate contract, without offering any guarantee of stabilization. The gap between the cost of the CdR for the institution and the net amount received by the researcher finally makes the salary non-competitive at an international level. Since the CdR has a ceiling, it will no longer be possible to pay net salaries of even 2,500 (or more) euros per month, as was the case for grant holders in many competitive sectors. And the list could go on.

To address the critical issues of the new contract and prevent the expulsion of thousands of young people from research, on April 29, Senator Mario Occhiuto, in the Seventh Commission of the Senate, presented an amendment to the so-called Pnrr Scuola that introduces, alongside the CdR, two new figures, more flexible and in line with the needs of many young people and the scholarly community: "the post-doc assignment" and "the research assignment". To protect workers, these assignments include fiscal, social security, and protection (sickness, maternity) obligations and guarantees. The minimum amount for the "research assignment" will be established by a decree of the MUR, but an explicit reference to the net economic treatment of a type-A researcher with a fixed term is desirable.

I signed and strongly support this proposal because I live every day, and I am constantly reminded by hundreds of young people and colleagues, the urgency of providing research with alternative contractual forms to the CdR. Without immediate intervention, most young researchers tomorrow will no longer be able to access their laboratories and studies, because from now on their respective project managers know with certainty that they can no longer guarantee them any continuity.

The vote on the Occhiuto amendment is expected this week. Ignoring or dropping this proposal would mean consciously taking on the responsibility of denying thousands of young people the opportunity to have a future of research in Italy. Postponing it to another occasion, another decree, would mean condemning thousands of lives and ideas to uncertainty.

In this case, not doing anything, thinking that inertia can bring a political advantage among those who support or oppose a certain reform is the most irresponsible thing one can do. I do not want to and cannot be part of this irresponsibility and I will do everything I can – even taking on the political responsibility of defending a text that I did not draft – so that this Parliament recognizes that text as the only lifeline available in the immediate future. Everyone will have to take responsibility for a possible parliamentary failure of this reform possibility: everyone, for different reasons, will have given up – in their role – on collaborating to correct a wrong course, the result of a regulatory disaster, which risks transforming Italy into the Titanic of research and the prospects for economic and social growth that derive from it.

Elena Cattaneo is a professor at the University of Milan and a senator for life

More on these topics: