A precarização do trabalho docente: a figura do professor substituto na Universidade Federal do Amazonas

Abstract

This study analyses the work of substitute university professors and their position within the Federal University of Amazonas as an institution and their temporary relation to tenured professors, with a view to deciding whether the work of substitute professors may be deemed precarious or not. After discussing the literature on the precarious nature of much of today’s employment, and presenting the copious legislation, both national and local, governing the contracting of substitute professors by federal universities, it becomes clear that sucessive federal governments have shaped a mould for substitute professors which restricts their work conditions to the point that the function of substitute professor cannot but be seen as presenting a wide range of precarious characteristics. These characteristics serve a dual purpose: first, they are internally restrictive, imposing multiple limitations on the substitute’s activities, and indicating absolute precariousness; secondly they are external, insulating the substitute’s work area in such a way as to make it impossible for the existence of a temporary position to justify the hiring of another career professor. This interpretation is enriched by the questionnaire answered by 88 of the current 224 substitute professors, which confirms two crucial, though seemingly contradictory points: first, the substitute professor’s work cannot be seen as anything but precarious and secondly, the overwhelming majority have a positive evaluation of their experience as substitute professors. However, even though substitute professors make up 20% of UFAM faculty, the university does not possess any kind of process that governs the routine and the academic posititon of substitute professors, a lacuna which ends up affecting the substitute’s remaining relationships. Academic relations within the university, both professor-student and tenured professor-probationary professor are based essentially on ethics. The temporary and limited character of the substitute professor’s work, it seems, does not demand the ethical concerns that underlie the remaining academic relations within the university, resulting in the quality and quantity overloads apparent from the majority of the answers to the questionnaire.