National collective agreement for schools, Anief: “Discussion continues at Aran”

National collective agreement for schools Anief Discussion continues at Aran

(Finance) – “The discussion continues at the Aran regarding the contractual sequences referring to article 178 of the hypothesis of the 2019/21 national collective agreement, signed on 14 July. As announced, the first meeting took place today at the Aran , with the topics referred to in letters e) and g) on ​​the agenda: at the opening of the meeting, the public party confirmed its first proposal, deeming it possible to define legislation for the permanent university technologist within of the EP profile, while for research contracts he proposed to limit the comparison to the sole possibility of including the value of the financial compensation in the CCNL. Anief argued against both Aran’s hypothesis on research contracts and the Permanent technologist”. This is what he says Anief in a note.

For what concern Research contract, Anief asked to include the figure within the CCNL providing the same protections as Researchers/Technologists. In regulating the new figure, the young union also deems it appropriate to specify the possibility of carrying out the work even part-time, to explain the possibility of evaluating the periods worked for stabilization purposes, to provide for the use of specific funds to be made available in Administrations. Regarding the use of the Research Contract in Universities, Anief asks to refer to the Researcher and Technologist profiles already provided for the EPRs.

“For the permanent University Technologist – he explains Marcello Pacifico, national president of Anief – we believe that this figure should be considered in a similar way to that already present in the EPR. It is unthinkable to have first class technologists and second class technologists in the same contract. The inclusion of the figure in the EP profile also risks creating critical issues in terms of economic coverage, with the risk of a strong reduction in employment levels”.

For its part, the Aran – which represents the administrations – reiterated its position and underlined that in the absence of precise legal provisions it does not intend to change its position. Also with respect to the use of specific funds to be allocated to these figures, so as not to burden in any way the funds allocated to the staff of the various institutions, Aran believes that these issues can only be addressed in the presence of precise regulatory indications. At the end of the meeting, Anief reiterated his belief in being able to use the available bargaining space to find solutions to the critical issues mentioned above, and asked Aran to give its active contribution also through a request to the legislator