Are they a burden to the general public?

The private lecturer Andrea Franc hit a nerve in her NZZ interview – and triggered many annoyed reactions. She accuses humanities and social scientists of often only working part-time and therefore being a burden to the general public. In Switzerland, tuition fees are low and only cover a small part of the costs. The course is thus largely publicly funded.

This practice is at least implicitly associated with the expectation that the use of funds will be worthwhile for society: the university graduates should prove themselves on the labor market, earn an attractive income and thus contribute disproportionately to state financing through progressive taxation.

In this respect, one’s own decision about the subject of study and the degree of employment also has repercussions on society. But are Andrea Franc’s allegations justified? Humanities scholars and social scientists are a heterogeneous group, including theologians, philosophers, historians, psychologists, linguists, sociologists and political scientists. Nevertheless, certain statements can be made. In any case, a look at the data shows that the humanities and social scientists have decent wages on average – provided they work 100 percent. Franc had also emphasized this.

This can be gathered from the annual graduate survey of the Federal Statistical Office. Five years after graduation, the mean earnings (50 percent achieve more, 50 percent less) of master’s graduates 97,000 francs if they work full-time. At CHF 93,000, humanities and social scientists are slightly lower. Economists, lawyers and doctors earn over 100,000 francs.

However, these figures are only half the truth. It is striking that five years after graduating from the humanities and social sciences, only a minority, namely 44.5 percent of those in employment, fill a full-time positionwhile the number of economists is almost twice as high at 85.7 percent – ​​and such striking differences are evident regardless of gender.

However, even “mini-rates” of less than 50 percent are not the norm for those who work: “Only” 8 percent of humanities and social scientists work less than half a day, while among economists it is not even one in every hundred. On average, the employment rate for social scientists and humanities is 80 percent, for economists it is even 95 percent.

However, the true difference between the subjects is even greater. It should also be taken into account that 5 out of 100 humanities and social scientists with a master’s degree are not employed, while for economists it is only 1.5 out of 100. An initial conclusion is thus: part-time work dominates among humanities and social scientists, but mini-jobs are – at least five years after graduation – atypical. However, low hours and non-employment are much more common than in other subjects.

Involuntary part-time

the Swiss Academy for Humanities and Social Sciences claims that in a highly developed economy, the skills imparted by the humanities are in demand with an increasing tendency. She sees the broad and generalized knowledge of the graduates as a trump card. Education economist Stefan Wolter from the University of Bern does not share this optimistic view. In any case, he also sees hurdles in the integration of graduates of these disciplines into the labor market.

First, it is questionable whether there are enough suitable jobs for these graduates. The decision to work part-time is not always voluntary. At Master’s level, for example, 31 percent of part-time humanities and social scientists say that there was no way of getting a full-time job. The figure is 22 percent for economists, only 11 percent for medical students and 6 percent for technical science graduates.

Every second humanities and social scientist also explains that part-time work stems from the desire to pursue personal interests alongside work. The proportion is similarly high in medicine and technical sciences, but there are far fewer part-time workers. In the case of economists, only one in three says so. The desire for self-development is problematic when it is subsidized by the solidarity community because it bears the high training costs. Around 30 percent of part-time workers in all departments assert family care obligations (on the Reasons for part-time multiple answers were possible).

Second, Wolter’s own research has shown that even graduates with poor grades can still find adequate employment in the natural sciences. In the humanities and social sciences, on the other hand, graduates with moderate grades are much less likely to find employment that corresponds to their level of education. For bad graduates in the humanities and social sciences, the prospects on the job market are therefore significantly worse than in other subjects, he says.

It is fitting that the humanities and social sciences are often the catch-all for students who drop out of their original studies but still try again. Through the inflows from other subjects the number of students is growing by a good tenth. Finally it is noticed that only a good 40 percent of the humanities and social scientists in the private sector are active, while the proportion of economists is twice as high.

Work hours of at least 70 percent required

If graduates of a degree work more part-time, this reduces their income and thus their tax bill. This can go so far that the tax payments do not even cover the study costs. Education researcher Wolter assumes public costs for a tertiary degree of 70,000 francs. According to Wolter, in order to absorb these additional costs via taxes, a graduate should work an average of at least 70 percent over their entire working life.

However, they differ Tuition costs depending on the department clear: for lawyers, economists and social scientists it is almost 10,000 francs per year, for dentists on the other hand more than 50,000 francs. The degree of employment required to cover the additional costs thus increases with the study costs and falls with the income.

teachers with the lowest workloads

Almost all economists easily jump the hurdle to “profitability” because they work hard, earn a lot, and their tuition costs are below average. This should also apply to the majority of humanities and social scientists. The Bologna reform had the positive side effect that the length of studies and completion rates between the subjects have become more similar. The “eternal student” is a discontinued model.

It is striking that teachers who come from teacher training colleges have the highest proportion of low part-time work compared to other university graduates. The training costs of CHF 17,000 and more per year are also considerable. When teachers their level of employment would increase by an average of 10 percentage pointsone would not have to worry too much about the shortage of teachers.

Necessary discussion

All in all, students are a burden to the public if they only have small jobs. Subsequent tuition fees could ensure fair compensation. According to Wolter, they should ensure that everyone who completes tertiary education covers the education costs they incur through the taxes they pay.

For comparison, the income and tax payments of people of the same sex who have completed an apprenticeship would be used. If, in one year, the additional tax payment compared to a person with an apprenticeship exceeds the additional costs of studying, for example CHF 2,000, there is no need to pay a fee. The 2,000 francs are the result of dividing the 70,000 francs for a tertiary degree by 35 years of professional experience. This should not be a problem for the vast majority of graduates.

However, this moderate cost-sharing would motivate students to think more about what job opportunities their subject offers and what level of employment they want to aim for. You should also think twice about starting a new one after a failed degree. And according to Wolter, it would have the side effect that university graduates tended to return to work a little more quickly after the birth of a child in order to avoid the tax. If both partners work 70 percent, for example, there would hardly be any subsequent tuition fees.

Andrea Franc has thus initiated a necessary discussion – even if it turned out to be a bit shrill. Society can expect publicly funded graduates to give something back.

With subsequent and moderate tuition fees, the accusation that students would be a burden on the general public could be refuted. At the same time, the polluter pays principle, which is an essential feature of every liberal society, would have been satisfied.