I just saw this video on Biocurious:
And I have to agree with Dobbs, postdocs are underpaid largely due to an oversupply of foreign PhDs (and yes, I am a foreigner, although I received my PhD here in the US). This is why women drop out of science, this is why there most blogs written by postdocs are filled with complaints. And yes, this is why that old argument that Americans are just not interested in science is hogwash.
But do you really think that the solution is to build bigger walls around the nation?
This is America, a nation built on immigration, and now you want to prevent the influx of highly skilled, highly trained people?
That makes no sense what so ever. But there is another way to fix the problem. What Lou Dobbs doesn't know is that in the life sciences most postdoc salaries are dictated by guidelines issued from the NIH. These guidelines were fine when a postdoc was nothing more than a two year stint as he or she waited for a junior faculty offer. But those days are long gone. The last time the suggested postdoc salary was increased, was when concerned FACULTY lobbied the NIH to change the guidelines. I guess you might be wondering why postdocs haven't banded together and formed unions. Well some have tried, but to be honest the position is still a temporary one (lasting about four to seven years in the life sciences) and involves quite a large commitment in terms of time and energy.
Now here is something else Dobbs is ignorant of, countries such as China are starting to build up their scientific institutions. More and more Chinese postdocs are heading back to China to start up labs. If the US wants to remain the center of scientific research, it has to start attracting Americans into science, and that means giving PhDs and postdocs a living wage.
So if you really care about the future of Science in the US, Lou Dobbs, then lobby the government to change the guidelines issued by the NIH and other governmental agencies.
- Log in to post comments
Wait! WUT!? I thought you're fucking Canadian?
Lou Dobbs thinks the answer to everything is to keep the foreigners out. And since he is 100% Native Born American, he can say that with a straight face. Lou is firmly in the "I got mine and you can go suck air." camp that has served us so well since the Reagan administration.
Most salaries above minimum wage levels are determined by the laws of supply and demand. There are many more qualified post-docs compared to the number of jobs so the wages are simply a reflection of this situation. Increasing the wage levels will simply result in an increase in the number of applicants from overseas making it even less likely that US scientists will be employed. A more rational solution would be to lower the wage levels to that where less individuals are encouraged to take up the career in the first place, or emigrate from their home countries to work in the US. A lot of Europeans and Japanese go to the US for Post Doc experience bringing funding from their home countries. If 'free' postdocs like this are an option then why not make this the norm and abolish post-doc wages entirely?
I think one of the major lessons you learn as a working researcher is that there are far more people becoming qualified compared to any realistic hope of gainful employment or career path. This is a reality that needs to be impressed at the appropriate time - when a teenage high school student is choosing what to do for a living - rather than the wrong time -
as a thirty plus year old postdoc.
A more rational solution (to the fact that postdoc wages are too low to attract Americans into science) is to lower the pay even further? Also it is not the case in the biomedical life sciences that most foreign postdocs arrive with money. If you are Chinese of Indian and highly educated, coming to the US to postdoc is a good move, despite the "low" wage because you would do much worse (salary and career wise) if you stayed at home. The same could be said for most European postdocs.
Also, postdoc pay is much better than it was 10-15 years ago BECAUSE of changes in the NIH guidelines. Considering the huge supply of postdocs from around the world, and the limited of slots in good labs (mostly in the US) you can only fix the solution by either closing the border or hiking up the pay in the guidelines. The free market is not always the best cure.
Alex, I'm with you in spirit on this one (I'm also a foreign post-doc!), my comment above is simply playing devils advocate with the overall question.
There is a big difference between scientific research and almost every other profession on the planet - in that it is essentially a universal qualification. Scientific research at a decent level is done through communicating experimental results in English to fellow scientists who all follow the agreed principle of methodological naturalism. This means that the field is essentially open to all qualified candidates from around the globe.
Compare that to professions like law, medicine, accountancy etc, and you will see that the potential competition for limited jobs is enormously greater in our line of work.
Many of us were the best in our class in junior or high school in scientific subjects. Perhaps we went to good universities and were the best or amongst the best in the class there too. Now we join a job market where we compete with students who are amongst the top scientific students of entire continents!
Increasing the wage levels of US post docs will only lead to more foreigners being attracted to apply for jobs in the US - unless you impose stricter guidelines for entry to the US jobmarket.
We should, however, be clear about certain points.
The current situation is NOT bad for science.
Its certainly not bad for universities and employers - there is huge competition for jobs and wages are incredibly low compared to the length of time required for qualification and training (which is probably equivalent to that of a surgeon). This is an ideal scenario for any employer.
Where it is bad is for the personal aspirations and quality of life of the researcher themselves who has to survive the social darwinism of our chosen profession.
I personally feel that I was not informed of this aspect of this career. I was perfectly willing to accept things like relatively low wages but the really mentally destructive aspect of the job is the lack of long term job security (and this is without taking the recent economic downturn into account). I suspect the actual numbers of jobs that scientific research can support is far smaller than even the current numbers of qualified individuals being produced by the Universities. I now find it unethical to encourage young people to follow the traditional researcher career path without fully informing them of what to expect (informed consent should apply to both the researcher as well as the patients!).
Alex, I'm with you in spirit on this one (I'm also a foreign post-doc!), my comment above is simply playing devils advocate with the overall question.
There is a big difference between scientific research and almost every other profession on the planet - in that it is essentially a universal qualification. Scientific research at a decent level is done through communicating experimental results in English to fellow scientists who all follow the agreed principle of methodological naturalism. This means that the field is essentially open to all qualified candidates from around the globe.
Compare that to professions like law, medicine, accountancy etc, and you will see that the potential competition for limited jobs is enormously greater in our line of work.
Many of us were the best in our class in junior or high school in scientific subjects. Perhaps we went to good universities and were the best or amongst the best in the class there too. Now we join a job market where we compete with students who are amongst the top scientific students of entire continents!
Increasing the wage levels of US post docs will only lead to more foreigners being attracted to apply for jobs in the US - unless you impose stricter guidelines for entry to the US jobmarket.
We should, however, be clear about certain points.
The current situation is NOT bad for science.
Its certainly not bad for universities and employers - there is huge competition for jobs and wages are incredibly low compared to the length of time required for qualification and training (which is probably equivalent to that of a surgeon). This is an ideal scenario for any employer.
Where it is bad is for the personal aspirations and quality of life of the researcher themselves who has to survive the social darwinism of our chosen profession.
I personally feel that I was not informed of this aspect of this career. I was perfectly willing to accept things like relatively low wages but the really mentally destructive aspect of the job is the lack of long term job security (and this is without taking the recent economic downturn into account). I suspect the actual numbers of jobs that scientific research can support is far smaller than even the current numbers of qualified individuals being produced by the Universities. I now find it unethical to encourage young people to follow the traditional researcher career path without fully informing them of what to expect (informed consent should apply to both the researcher as well as the patients!).
Ooops, double post. I blame those overpaid computer IT types!
Sigmund,
Concerning 90% of the issues here, we're on the same page. However you have to admit that if the NIH increased the suggested postdoc salary in its guidelines, Americans would benefit much more then foreigners. If I was a PI in an American university and wanted to hire a postdoc and had to choose between an equally qualified American and foreigner, I would hire American first simply because it would be easier for the American to either get a grant or to be paid through my NIH R01.
How does the US make the science profession more appealing for Americans?
1) Increase pay
2) Increased job stability by promoting career postdocs (In other words revamping the pyramid scheme that academic science has become)
Even if the increase in pay and job security attracts more foreign workers,
1) postdocs will be more expensive, and less would be hired
2) more Americans would enter the market and they will be hired over the foreigners for the reasons stated above.
No one in their right mind would get a PhD in science and hop on the post-doc pogo stick. You are being used and abused for pennies, terry nickell and dimed all the way. Leave the sciences to the foreigners, who seem to enjoy low pay, low respect, low quality life, and enjoying being the PI's slave. EVEN if you "make" it, junior faculty whatever, then you jump onto the publishing pogo stick whereby you pay to "publish" in magazines whereby you select "reviewers" or know the editors etc....it is a rigged game. For what, 35-55K/year?!?! are YOU SERIOUS???? Before taxes, many are probably living off of a trust fund, or an inheritance.
I just saw this! Thanks for making me want to kill myself! I'm never coming back here! Instead I will put my fingers in my ears and go "LALALALALA" and keep pretending that I will be able to feed myself and a family when/if I graduate!
A+++ Super Happy Fun Time Go Go Go!