Newsgroup sci.research.postdoc 5023

Directory

In article <5omqld$kt1@nnrp2.farm.idt.net>, Joshua Halpern  says:
>
>
>I was a bit more fixed on the idea that you were asserting that the
>bulk of Ph.Ds come from run of the mill (or lower) schools.  That is
>an urban legend that has really distorted the entire debate about
>Ph.D overproduction.  As we agree, the problem is at the top, not the
>bottom.  
WE AGREE HERE.
>
>Looking through the NAS study, one finds that private schools account fo
>about half of the schools in the top quartile in most fields.  In some
>such as chemistry the private schools fall to about 40% or a bit less,
>but as a rule of thumb 50% private/public is a fair estimator
The NAS study may be correct, however I have serious doubts about
anything those purveyors of the great lie about an impending scientist
shortage might declare as fact.
>
(deleted stuff) Thus there is a rough
>balance in Ph.D. production between private and public universities,
>although there may be single fields in which one or the other dominate.
>Not being paid to do the survey, I will leave it at that!
>
>josh halpern
I'm not concerned about the balance issue, too many for the market
is the issue.  
It is especially bad in biological sciences, physics and psychology.
I also just read that it is now quite bad for PhD economists (The 
New  Yorker, I think Dec. 1996.)

Jim Graham wrote:
> 
> ...Therefore I'd like to expand my
> questions to:
>
> NSF Life-sciences?
NSF's Postdoctoral Research Fellowships are now paying $80,000 total
over 2 years.  (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/1997/nsf9730/nsf9730.htm)

In my field (neuroscience), and my experiences postdoc hunting, it is commonly
accepted that NRSAs do not pay enough, and the labs that I talked to
typically kick in a few thousand on top of the NRSA.
Interestingly, postdoc salaries for IRTA fellows (similar to NRSAs) 
who work _at_ the NIH are a bit higher.  I've seen the pay scales
online somwhere - it's not centralized since each institute within the
NIH seems sets their own, but I don't know any postdoc who doesn't
make at least $26K/year, with an additional $1-$2/K per year beyond
the PhD.  Several scientists here have commented on how IRTA pay
exceeds NRSA.  Apparently a few years back it was the other way around.
Summary: at least in my field, it is _assumed_ that an NRSA will
somehow be supplemented by the lab you're working in.
-- 
   Rob Butera					home: butera@patriot.net
   Rockville, MD USA				work: butera@helix.nih.gov

In article <5opvld$72d@nnrp4.farm.idt.net>, Joshua Halpern  says:
>
>>
>I suspect you may be confusing NSF with NAS.  As far as I am aware
>(although I stand ready to be corrected) NAS never published a study
>claiming there would be an impending scientist shortage.
>
You may be correct, I am not sure.  For discussion sake I'll agree that
you are correct.
>OTOH, compared to other types of workers, un and underemployment in
>science may be low.  Looking at the results of the ACS 1997 salary 
>survey (9500 respondents) there were 2% unemployed vs 3% in 1996
>and 3.2% in 1972.  So things are getting better.
>
Chemists are generally not as badly off as people in other science fields.
Still, we have had an untold number of chemistry oriented postdocs float
through our lab during the past decade.  If jobs were plentiful, we
would never be able to find people willing to take a term-limited job,
with only a prayer that it would become permanent.
Too, I am very very skeptical of the figures below because there is
no adequate way to tell how many have given up /changed fields, nor
is there any way to adjust the numbers for the possibility that 
the unemployed and underemployed may not be returning questionnaires at
the same rate as those employed.  (the opposite is also  possible)
For comparison, in the survey 93.5% are full time employed, 
>2.3% are on post-docs, 2.1% are part time and 2% are unemployed.
>
>In good times, for comparison, the survey has found that
>2% are on post-docs, 1.5% are part timers and 1% are unemployed
>but looking.
>
>This 4.5% of chemists without full time jobs increased from
>1989 to 8.5% in 1995, and has fallen this year to 6.5%
>
>Josh Halpern
>
>

In sci.research.careers nospamdahd  wrote:
: In article <5omqld$kt1@nnrp2.farm.idt.net>, Joshua Halpern  says:
SNIP...: >
: The NAS study may be correct, however I have serious doubts about
: anything those purveyors of the great lie about an impending scientist
: shortage might declare as fact.
: >
I suspect you may be confusing NSF with NAS.  As far as I am aware
(although I stand ready to be corrected) NAS never published a study
claiming there would be an impending scientist shortage.
OTOH, compared to other types of workers, un and underemployment in
science may be low.  Looking at the results of the ACS 1997 salary 
survey (9500 respondents) there were 2% unemployed vs 3% in 1996
and 3.2% in 1972.  So things are getting better.
For comparison, in the survey 93.5% are full time employed, 
2.3% are on post-docs, 2.1% are part time and 2% are unemployed.
In good times, for comparison, the survey has found that
2% are on post-docs, 1.5% are part timers and 1% are unemployed
but looking.
This 4.5% of chemists without full time jobs increased from
1989 to 8.5% in 1995, and has fallen this year to 6.5%
Josh Halpern

Thanks Rebecca. Is that the salary you or those around you are getting 
(40K/ year) from an NSF grant? (Is that overhead and fringe benefits are 
actuall take-home salary)
Again, I do find the perspectives on supply and demand in the academic 
job market interesting, but I would rather answer some "killer" 
questions here. (What are "good" life-sciences postdoc salaries and 
annual raises, and what is the actual agency writing or requiring low 
postdoc salary lines on institutional grants?)
From what I have recently heard, what may be the most important actual 
reason that funded project grants do not pay a reasonable salary lines 
to sucessful young postdocs (say year 3) may be related to some kind of 
"department payroll" intervention. 
This gets to be really bizzare when one is recieving essential "0" 
departmental commitment, say runing a lab on soft money only, and yet a 
departmental agent must "approve" salary lines submitted on federal 
grants. For the employee, it sounds a lot like the classic used car 
sales ploy, with any salary negotiations occuring between the potential 
employee and a PI who might therefore lack authority to set reasonable 
postdoc salaries. Can anyone explain the instutional role in determining 
or limiting postdoc salaries??
If this is the case, it would beg the question, has anyone talked 
directly to "the man" when negotiating a postdoc salary or annual raise? 
(How could some kind of buisness department manager determine the value 
of a particular individual in a complex research project?)
(I had hoped to get a much better response on these questions. Knowledge 
here is power colleagues -and we certainly are lacking it. Therefore 
every individual reply is quite valuble. I feel I have learned a great 
deal from a few replies. Thanks very much.)
Jim
J. Graham PhD

In article <33B1560E.6491@biodec.wustl.edu>, Jim Graham  says:
>
>Thanks Rebecca. Is that the salary you or those around you are getting 
>(40K/ year) from an NSF grant? (Is that overhead and fringe benefits are 
>actuall take-home salary)
>
>Again, I do find the perspectives on supply and demand in the academic 
>job market interesting, but I would rather answer some "killer" 
>questions here. (What are "good" life-sciences postdoc salaries and 
>annual raises, and what is the actual agency writing or requiring low 
>postdoc salary lines on institutional grants?)
>
>From what I have recently heard, what may be the most important actual 
>reason that funded project grants do not pay a reasonable salary lines 
>to sucessful young postdocs (say year 3) may be related to some kind of 
>"department payroll" intervention. 
>
(deleted paragraph)
If this is the case, it would beg the question, has anyone talked 
>directly to "the man" when negotiating a postdoc salary or annual raise? 
>(How could some kind of buisness department manager determine the value 
>of a particular individual in a complex research project?)
>
>(I had hoped to get a much better response on these questions. Knowledge 
>here is power colleagues -and we certainly are lacking it. Therefore 
>every individual reply is quite valuble. I feel I have learned a great 
>deal from a few replies. Thanks very much.)
>
>Jim
>J. Graham PhD
Jim, I think you are on to something here.  There are at least 3 general
types of postdoc.  1)Work at a University for someone who has grant money.
2) Work for a government agency
3) Industrial employment
Personnel and employer policies have lots to do with how salaries are
set in each of these arenas.
  I do know that 'human resources' people have input into these
matters.  So do budgets.  If a PI has a limited budget he will advertise
for a postdoc and accept the person most willing to take a low salary.
If it were not for the huge oversupply of scientists
and overly generous admission of foreign nationals into both the graduate
schools and the postdoc pipeline, the price of employing scientists
(salaries) would surely increase.
One irony in all of this is the fact that once a scientists has made
it into a position where he/she is the employer, the scientist must then
seek to hire at the lowest possible cost.  In this way the most successful
scientists are inadvertently driving down salaries for all scientists by
their own behavior.  

Here at FHCRC there have been 2 fairly recent administration interventions
in determining postdoc salaries. Both have improved the situation for
postdocs.
1. The official "recommended" policy now is that postdocs be paid at NIH
scale or above. Before this, quite a few postdocs were paid below scale,
whatever their PIs could afford or were willing to pay and they were
willing to accept. For example, a first year postdoc, instead of getting
year 1 scale at ~$19k/yr might only get $17K. Or a year 3 postdoc might
get only $20K/yr instead of the ~25K/yr scale. If this policy creates some
kind of problem, there are ways to get around it. I am not sure how many
exceptions have been granted. One possible effect of this policy may be to
discourage PIs from taking on more advanced postdocs, e.g. second or third
postdocs, because these people will require a much higher salary. This is
not altogether bad, since I think multiple postdocs should be discouraged.
2. No postdoc at FHCRC may be paid less than what a graduate student
makes. This policy has something to do with some recent rule from NIH.
Before this policy, there were about 5 postdocs getting paid less than a
grad student here makes, which is $14K/yr.
As an aside, I note that when my husband was first becoming a postdoc, in
1985, first year scale was $18K/yr whereas grad students made $5-6K/yr
(off an NIH training grant). In 1997 first year postdoc scale is $19K/yr
and grad students get $14K/yr. Why has it been possible for NIH, over the
last 12 years, to increase the amount they pay grad students (a 250%
increase) whereas they cannot pay postdocs more (only a 5-6% increase)? It
has been suggested by some that the high salary for grad students is to
entice them into the PhD program. Then after they have completed the PhD,
they are "trapped" in the scientist career track and so will accept
extremly low postdoc salaries (they have no bargaining power).
Megan
--
Megan Brown
mbrown@fred.fhcrc.org
--------------------------------------
Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
Seattle, Washington
--------------------------------------

The newly formed Maintenance and Reliability Center at The University of 
Tennessee has recently received a NSF grant to develop new classes in 
Maintenance and Reliability Engineering.  We are currently looking for a 
graduate student in ME, EE or other related engineering discipline to assist 
in developing a teaching laboratory.  
The position is open for the 97-98 academic year and may be renewed for up to 
3 years.
Desired Skills:
Knowledge of C, C++, MATLAB, NI data acquisition products including LAB Views.
Knowledge of measurement systems.
Excellent communication skills.
Web page development.
BS in an engineering discipline.
Please reply with cover letter, resume, and transcripts to:
Dr. Wesley Hines
The University of Tennessee
212 Pasqua Engineering Building
Knoxville, Tennessee  37996-2300
Dr. J. Wesley Hines                  hines@utkux.utk.edu
Research Assistant Professor         The University of Tennessee
Department of Nuclear Engineering    Applied Artificial Intelligence
Fax (423)-974-0668

A newly established ophthalmic research institute in Singapore seeks
postdocs to do research in myopia and vision science in general. 
Attractive renumeration packages await the successful applicants.
Candidates with ophthalmology background are preferred though it is
not an absolute pre-requisite.
Applicants are invited to submit their CVs by email to the Deputy
Director at seri_jt@hotmail.com	

Have you tried using LISA with Microsoft Internet Mail
or MS Outlook Express...?
It's  great, have a look at http://www.beechwood.com
Regards,
Joop Blokker

Has anyone deferred their student loans while doing a postdoc.  If so, what
are the necessary steps?  Please reply by email.  Thanks.
-Chris
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   Christopher D. Judd                                                     |
|   400 Brunswick Dr 15-6            juddc@rpi.edu    NLO & spectroscopy:   |
|   Troy, NY 12180-6651               518 279-4585    Fun with photons      |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is to announce a postdoctoral opening in the density-functional
theory of interfaces.  Professor Tony Evans of Harvard University and Dr.
John Smith of General Motors are collaborating on research into the
fundamental properties of coating materials.  Coatings are being made at
GM, their thermomechanical properties are being measured at Harvard, and
first-principles computations on the same materials are being carried out
at GM. The postdoctoral student would be a Harvard employee located
primarily at GM.   We will be carrying out computations with moderately
large, existing codes, as well as developing new computational methods.
The position is available immediately.  Candidates should have experience
in handling relatively large computer codes.  Experience in
density-functional theory is preferred but not required.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
      http://www.dejanews.com/     Search, Read, Post to Usenet

(Hello colleagues, this is a continued thread asking what specifically 
limits postdoc salaries at the stage of putting numbers to paper (rather 
than yet another exploration of economics, academics, and public 
policy.)
Again, I do find perspectives on supply and demand in the research job 
market interesting, but I would rather answer some "killer" questions 
here. (What are "good" life-sciences postdoc salaries and annual raises, 
and what is the actual agency writing or requiring low postdoc salary 
lines on institutional NIH grants?)
From what I have recently heard, what may be the most important actual 
reason that funded NIH project grants do not pay a reasonable salaries  
to senior sucessful young life-sciences postdocs (say year 3) may be 
related to some kind of "department payroll" or institutional  
intervention. 
This gets to be really bizzare when one is recieving essential "0" 
departmental commitment, say runing a lab on soft money only, and yet a 
departmental agent must "approve" salary lines submitted on federal 
grants. For the employee, it sounds a lot like the classic used car 
sales ploy, with any salary negotiations occuring between the potential 
employee and a PI who might therefore lack authority to set reasonable 
postdoc salaries. Can anyone explain the instutional role in determining 
or limiting postdoc salaries??
If this is the case, it would beg the question, has anyone talked 
directly to (a) "the man" behind the curtain when negotiating a postdoc 
salary or annual raise? (How could some kind of buisness manager 
determine the value of a particular individual in a complex research 
project? Would this be one goal such an aditional administrative level 
-that he not know, and therefore be limited to a particular low scale? )
(I had hoped to get a much better response on these questions. Knowledge 
here is power colleagues -and we certainly seem lack it, given that no 
one has answered the central question. Therefore, every individual reply 
is quite valuble. More PI's please speak out. I feel I have learned a 
great deal from a few replies. Thanks very much.)
Jim

At the institution I am posting from, post-doc salaries are bracketed
between that of the grad student range and tenure track assistant professor
range ($15-50K). Of course, much of this is funny money.  The employing professor can
skimp by giving a fractional appointment.  The post-doc can also supplement
their income by consulting up to 20% of their time.

Jim Graham wrote:
> 
> Thanks Rebecca. Is that the salary you or those around you are getting
> (40K/ year) from an NSF grant? (Is that overhead and fringe benefits are
> actuall take-home salary)
Don't quote me, but I believe that is an actual salary of $40K. (No
benefits are included in the deal).  AFAIK, the university can't charge
overhead on this amount. 
> Again, I do find the perspectives on supply and demand in the academic
> job market interesting, but I would rather answer some "killer"
> questions here. (What are "good" life-sciences postdoc salaries and
> annual raises, and what is the actual agency writing or requiring low
> postdoc salary lines on institutional grants?)
The LANL perspective:  Our postdoc salaries are set institutionally,
non-negotiable, and based on a "years since Ph.D." scale.  Starts at
$44,400 (Ph.D.+0 years) and goes up to $49,900 (Ph.D.+5), so you get
about a 2% raise annually on the anniversary of your Ph.D.  On top of
that, the pay scale moves up 1-2% a year, so you get a second pay raise
at the beginning of the fiscal year.  Plus full benefits.  They also
give out 2 Oppenheimer Postdoctoral Fellowships a year, which carry a
salary of $67,400 annual.
Becky

Christopher Judd wrote:
> 
> Has anyone deferred their student loans while doing a postdoc.  If so, what
> are the necessary steps?  Please reply by email.  Thanks.
> 
> -Chris
> 
...if anyone replies by mail, could you please post it to the group in
addition?  Others of us would be interested to know, too!
Thanks,
Kiley