Nancy Viellevoye is the first ombudsperson for Radboud University staff members. It is in this role that she will be able to investigate alleged cases of misconduct on campus, with the aim of making a contribution to social safety. ‘When it comes to dependent relationships, staff members are often afraid to report a problem.’

At the beginning of this month, Nancy Viellevoye set up office in the most striking building on the entire Nijmegen campus: Huize Heyendael. The academic building Berchmanianum was also an option, but Viellevoye preferred not to have her office there. ‘That would have given the impression that I’m working side-by-side with the Executive Board.’ And when it comes to an ombudsperson, that’s exactly the sort of impression that should not be conveyed.

It is in this position that the lawyer hopes to contribute to social safety on campus and the best way to do this is by exuding an air of independence, authority and neutrality. In her role as ombudsperson, Viellevoye can initiate investigations into alleged cases of misconduct on campus that involve a staff member. Such an investigation is subsequently followed by an evaluation and a recommendation. Another important task that is carried out by the ombudsperson is acting as a mediator in order to resolve disputes between staff members and supervisors, for the purpose of preventing a complaints procedure from being initiated.

Staff members can approach the ombudsperson if they have a complaint or a question about either the behaviour of another staff member or the code of conduct in a department. This may also be done anonymously and all discussions remain confidential. Viellevoye: ‘People can come and see me about any work-related problems. Most of all, I want to be accessible.’

The ombudsperson provides the university with a new ‘office’ where staff members can lodge a complaint about undesirable behaviour or poor employment practices. There is some overlap with the work that is carried out by the confidential advisors, who have had a presence at the university for a lot longer, but there are also a number of essential differences. The most important of these is that a confidential advisor assists a staff member who is lodging a complaint, while the ombudsperson operates impartially and functions as an intermediary between the parties (see the text box below).

In addition, a confidential advisor does not conduct their own investigation, whereas an ombudsperson does have the authority to do so. ‘If there is a suspected case of structural abuse, no stone must be left unturned,’ says Viellevoye on this matter. ‘This kind of authority constitutes my main added value for the university.’ The ombudsperson is able to initiate such an investigation within all divisions of the university, which includes those as high up as the Executive Board.

Viellevoye also hopes to be able to contribute to the resolution of a dispute before it escalates and leads to an official complaint. That is the essence of her work as a mediator. ‘A complaints procedure is often damaging for those who are involved and for the organisation. It leaves a gaping wound and has an enormous impact on a department, or on fellow workers.’ Viellevoye believes that if such a procedure can be avoided, it is ultimately better for everyone who is involved.

The boundaries of the ombudsperson’s playing field have been clearly defined: if the staff member is able to go to one of the existing complaints offices, such as those for undesirable behaviour or scientific integrity, Viellevoye will not need to investigate a formal complaint. The responsibility of making a decision will ultimately lie with a complaints committee in this situation. However, Viellevoye may advise, make a referral or mediate if those involved so wish.

Which issues will you be addressing?

‘There are obviously other possible reasons for a labour dispute. It doesn’t always need to be a matter of undesirable behaviour; such a dispute could also be related to occupational stress, for example. In such a case, I could act as a mediator in order to see if better arrangements can be made with the supervisor. If that doesn’t help, the formal channels could always be explored.’

‘I might be on the university’s payroll, but that doesn’t mean that I feel vulnerable.’

In what way can your independence be guaranteed?

‘There are Ombudsperson Regulations (these have been approved by the Works Council and have been adopted by the Executive Board, ed.) in which the rules are clearly described. These state, for example, that I don’t have a supervisor. Although I report my findings to the Executive Board, I will never be judged on the basis of the subject matter. I have a permanent contract; it is only if it can be proven that I have neglected my duties that I could be forced to leave my position.’

‘I might be on the university’s payroll, but that doesn’t mean that I feel vulnerable.’ Should it turn out that my contract of employment is only for a two-year period or a four-year period, then so be it. I still have other work and other sources of income.’

Do you think that you have enough clout for this position? You are the only ombudsperson at the university, and your appointment only permits you to work three days a week.

‘I think that I do have enough clout. Three days is substantial enough. Besides, I don’t have to carry out the investigations on my own; I always have the option of calling in experts. In such a case, I’ll assume the role of coordinator and I’ll then write the report.’

‘The most important challenge that I face in the foreseeable future is introducing myself to the other staff members. I have an induction programme, in which I speak to all the deans and directors. But how do I reach the other staff members, the people who I’ve been appointed to help? That’s where I’ll have to put in the most effort. I ultimately hope that the university embraces the ombudsperson’s post. And that includes the managers; I hope that people don’t just see me as a nuisance, but as someone with whom they can work to resolve problems, in collaboration with staff members.’

What prompted you to accept this position at Radboud University?

‘I primarily accepted the position because of the content of the work. I’ve been working for quite some time now as a lawyer and acting as a mediator in labour disputes. For me, the position of ombudsperson is the next step. I’m not only going to be seeking solutions through mediation, but I’m also authorised to conduct investigations. I’ll also be allowed to express an opinion on the results, which means that I’ll be allowed to pass judgement. This means that I won’t only be dealing with isolated disputes, but I’ll also be able to address structural problems that transcend the individual level.’

‘The second reason for accepting the position is that I have a strong affinity with Radboud University. I really enjoyed studying here – which was quite a long time ago now – and my husband did too. My children also studied at Radboud University, the youngest of whom is still studying here.’

What could be improved at Radboud University?

‘Just like any other large organisation, the university has many rules. This means that the human dimension is occasionally forgotten. At times, the individual interest is not heard or it is overlooked. What we still don’t have is a university-wide code of conduct that I could use as a point of reference, which begs the question: “How do we treat each other?” It’s essential that this code of conduct is implemented as soon as possible. I understand that the university has made significant progress on this front.’

‘PhD candidates are a vulnerable group’

‘The university is quite involved in recognition and rewards. Even if staff members don’t reach the highest academic rank, they still need to be recognised and rewarded. And that’s a good thing. These people are also important when it comes to the day-to-day work at the university.’

Your task is to contribute to social safety. What problems are typical for universities in this area?

‘The university is a large organisation that is hierarchically organised as well as competitive. Many people have a fixed-term contract and there are a lot of relationships of dependence. In that respect, PhD candidates are a vulnerable group. They depend quite heavily on their PhD supervisor. That may work out well, but there are also going to be PhD candidates who will feel short-changed. Fear of raising such an issue can then become a serious problem.’

What do you hope to achieve?

‘I don’t expect the introduction of my position to revolutionise the field of social safety within the next two years. But I do hope that a step has been taken in the right direction and that the position of ombudsperson becomes embedded in the organisation. I hope that the position is embraced, because it can contribute to the success of the organisation and the well-being of the staff members and, by extension, to both education and research.’

As the only ombudsperson at the university, you will need to stand your ground. If you get caught in the crossfire, how will you manage this?

‘I’m quite an autonomous person, and I always have been. It’s no problem for me if I have to swim against the tide. Even though I have the greatest respect for authority, it doesn’t carry any weight with me. In my opinion, a caretaker deserves just as much respect as a professor.’