On the Reorganization of the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes
As of 1 October 2022, the highest body of the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes (hereinafter referred to as the Institute or ÚSTR) approved a new organizational structure with six votes from the seven-member Council of the Institute (none against, one member abstained) and a new organizational structure within which the reorganization took place, in full compliance with the Labour Code. As part of the reorganization, six persons were dismissed from employment at the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes and will be paid severance pay, not only in the amount stipulated by the Labour Code, but significantly increased in accordance with the applicable collective agreement. The media have heard not only misleading information, but also false statements about specific employees of the Institute, which we hereby correct, with the help of numbers that do not side with anyone.
The information presented is based on two internationally recognised databases:
A) Bibliography of the History of the Czech Lands, Institute of History of the CAS presents the following publication activities of employees, current and former ÚSTR, whose names have recently appeared in the media in connection with the reorganization (https://biblio.hiu.cas.cz/#!/):
- MURIEL BLAIVE … 17 author’s publications
- PETR BLAZEK … 144 author’s publications
- LADISLAV KUDRNA … 69 author’s publications
- FRANTISEK STAREK … 14 author’s publications
B) The Research, Development and Innovation Information System lists the following publication activities for employees, current and former Institute, whose names have recently appeared in the media, in connection with reorganization (https://www.isvavai.cz/riv):
- MURIEL BLAIVE … 14 scored results, of which 1 professional book (monograph)
- PETR BLAZEK … 28 scored results, of which 3 professional books (monographs)
- LADISLAV KUDRNA … 23 scored results, of which 5 professional books (monographs)
- FRANTISEK STAREK … 9 scored results, of which 3 professional books (monographs)
The database Bibliography of the History of the Czech Lands, Institute of History of the Academy of Sciences, shows that during her employment at the Institute in 2014–2022, Dr. Muriel Blaive published one collective monograph as an editor, in which she has one study. Within the 14 scored results in the Information System of Research, Development and Innovation for the Institute, Dr. Muriel Blaive published 6 scored results. During her tenure at the Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes from 2014 to 2022, Dr. Muriel Blaive has not published any study, article or review in the institution’s periodicals Memory and History and Securitas Imperii.
The Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes is not an academic institution. Its activities and mission are defined by Act No. 181/2007 Coll. In addition to professional outputs, it ensures the popularization of employee outputs, including educational activities The Institute’s employees are primarily to publish within the institution under the auspices of the Institute under the auspices of the Institute including the institutional periodicals Memory and History and Securitas Imperii. Grants obtained within the framework of the Institute are a welcome bonus, which the management supports, but they are not an employee obligation. The grant received by Dr. Muriel Blaive within the Institute, to which she refers in the media, had to return to the GACR, and what was exhausted from it had to be paid by the Institute from its budget. The grant exceeded CZK 2 million. The final report of the GACR on the grant, where the investigator was Dr. Muriel Blaive, was absolutely devastating.
The Institute for the Study of Totalitarian Regimes, under the leadership of the current management, has always acted as an employer fully within the limits of its legal powers and in accordance with legal regulations. A small note at the end – in the discussion surrounding the reorganization of the Institute the argument of a larger number of dismissed women was repeatedly mentioned, but it can be described as completely tendentious, because it has not been added that the majority of women have joined the Institute, including important positions in the Institute’s management.