Is there any job security for tenured academics in Denmark?

I have recently been employed at University of Copenhagen in a temporary position. The current situation is definitely problematic.

Denmark has the general problem (shared with many other countries), that basic funding for universities has been cut over many years, and transferred to project specific funding for research centers or individual grants - more often than not provided by private companies and foundations, rather than the state.

This means that the extraordinary circumstances have become rather ordinary, and the case of prof. Thybo mentioned in the article, is not the only known case. Adding to this that many younger people are now being hired in assistant professor positions without tenure, although being at the age and reputation where they should really get tenure track positions or tenured positions, it certainly seems that University of Copenhagen is phasing out the concept of tenure.

To summarize: I think the conclusion that there is no job security at all in Denmark is rather harsh, but definitely not without reason. I would recommend anyone aiming for faculty positions in Denmark in general, and University of Copenhagen in particular, to do solid research into the financial situation of the department they are considering joining first.

I agree that there is not complete job security anywhere, but the academic tenure-position in Denmark is special. First, management such as the Dean is not voted in by their colleagues. It is actually hired as a manager from a hiring committee that evaluates the candidates cv. So when a new dean comes to office, often they want to arrange faculties to their liking and move budgets around, which often result in firings because the new research agenda changes. So they fire people simply because they do not fall into their research agenda using the excuse of "money problems". No freedom of research. It has happened in my faculty. Like 6 years ago a new dean from the economics department was hired in the Faculty of Social Sciences at SDU and a round of firings happened, affecting heavily the management department. Last year, a new dean came in, one who had been fired in the previous firing spree. He now attacked the economics department from which more than 30 people were fired.

The problem lies in the way institutions are formed at Danish universities in addition to the Danish labour law. A senior academic who has worked for 9+ years will get a 6 months notice (the maximum) and no monetary compensation for being fired. This is the Danish law which applies equally to every profession. Independently of whether the market for an academic is not as fluid as the market for instance a programmer. So a few months of notice is not enough when it takes like one year to find a new position.

This is a greater problem for non-EU foreigners who only have a few months to pack their bags (meaning sell property, find a new school for kids, etc) and leave as they are not allowed to stay too much longer after their contract is over.

Summarising, a tenure position in Denmark does not correspond to a tenure position in the US, UK, Ireland or Australia and definitely not to a civil servant position like in many other countries like Germany, Italy, France and Spain.

Note that this is not a criticism, but a description of how it works and something foreigners should know before moving to an academic position in Denmark.

No one has job security in a bad economy or in an institution with poor leadership. Nor will tenure protect you from bad behavior.

Tenure isn't an absolute guarantee of a job.

Universities close. Wars happen. National politicians make bad decisions. Departments are closed fairly frequently in fact. And they are cut back for lack of students or research funding even more frequently.

Tenure protects you from being fired for what you say and think and write; not from everything. That is why it exists, not to make you comfortable.

Tenure exists so that you can properly follow your research even in to corners that offend other people, and especially important and influential people. It is a particularly strong form of free speech.

But tenure won't protect you in cases of misconduct and the actual treatment of others. This is the issue in the case cited. The professor has been charged with misconduct - with breaking rules and norms, not with what he has said or written. I won't and can't judge the case from afar, but tenure won't protect you from charges of, for example, pressuring junior colleagues in improper ways - coercion, extortion, and such.

The case of cutting someone for financial reasons is fairly common - especially if departments need to shrink for financial reasons. But if the university has competent management they are more likely to have a plan in place for such situations. In the US there have been cases of the university offering to "buy back" tenure for, say, a year's salary. This can be used to encourage older faculty to retire so that new faculty can be hired. But that takes planning. There is no job security in the face of incompetence of management unless there are laws that let, for example, governments step in. And that assumes government will be more competent.

However, in any decisions affecting your employment, you probably have rights at law. This depends on the country, of course, but most places such decisions can be contested within the university and/or outside it. In many places a decision on propriety might come down to intent. If the university moves funds around with the intent of getting rid of an individual it would be seen (and judged) as improper most places. So, tenure isn't the only right that an individual has in such situations though it often provides a presumption that you can remain employed.

There are abuses of the tenure system, but it is usually on the side of not firing someone who is being offensive - especially if they are being offensive outside their normal duties. There is currently a case in the news in the US (Indiana University) where a professor is being racist and otherwise offensive. The Chancellor of the university counters his comments in public very strongly, but refuses to attack his tenure. He stays. He can say what he likes. But others can also call his offenses out and they can do it without fear of loss of tenure.

If he is racist and spouts it he can probably keep his job, but if he acts it out, say by refusing to teach non-white students, then he would likely be gone in an instant.

I know of another odd case. A major university (R1) wanted to form a new department for an emerging field that overlapped some others. To form the initial faculty, administrators asked heads of those other departments to "contribute" faculty to the new department. What happened was that those departments sent over their tenured incompetents who they would have liked to fire, but could not. The individuals kept their tenure but the other departments were now free to hire better people. The new department struggled for quite a while but eventually overcame the original situation.