Comments on: The solution: Hire scientists to do scientific research…

By: Beth

Beth — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:57:01 +0000

@Cathy – Definitely the stigma of “not being a PI” = failure is something we need to overcome, both for these Research Scientist/Associate positions, as well as other non-PI jobs. As for someone else getting credit, I would expect that a Research Scientist/Associate would still be getting authorship on papers for the research they produce – and if they were allowed to have their names on the grants that fund their salary, they could get credit that way too.

By: Cathy

Cathy — Tue, 08 Dec 2009 16:19:48 +0000

Hi everyone,
Great information supplied by others and I’m not sure if I can add anything.
My understanding is that the lab/research institute can apply for funds for a researcher with one grant. Then the researcher can be a co-applicant on other grants. It seems a bit strange but can work. I don’t want to give too many details in case it is a secret.
The salary for these positions is competitive with alternative careers. When I took a teaching position, my salary dropped. I don’t know about long term salaries.
The trouble seems to be pride and giving up the dream of being the PI…and it is tough to do a lot of the scientific research but having credit go to someone else.

By: Dave K

Dave K — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 10:15:37 +0000

Hi Beth,
I think the money issue is a very real one and it requires putting our resources in line with our goals. I think the money needs to come from two places (and as I said, I’m trying to figure out how it works over here exactly)

1. (and I know some RAs are paid like this over here) Granting agencies have to allow a PI to apply for full funding (read salary support) to cover these positions.

2. Universities and research institutes heavily invested in being “research intensive” need to find ways to pay for this kind of core assistance to their laboratories. In one (almost completely charity funded) building over here, there are approximately 10 labs, and there is money to have 5 Senior Scientific Officers at any given time, which means on average 1 for every two labs – not a bad start.

Realistically, when you look at the money being spent in medical science on reagents and new technologies, it makes the PDF salary box pale in comparison. I definitely spend 4-6 fold more than my salary every year on such things. If someone said, everyone cut back 10% and we can have a permanent research associate in the lab, I’d be on board in a heartbeat. But it can’t work like this because monies for reagents/tools is a separate pot from salaries.

You’re right that this is a problem now… what I’m advocating for is a change to these policies…

By: Beth

Beth — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 04:14:02 +0000

The first thing that comes to mind for me here is: where will the money for the Research Scientist/Research Associate salary come from? Currently, the major Canadian granting institutes do not allow anyone whose name is listed on a grant as (co-)investigator to take a salary from that grant – the assumption being that the university they work for is paying their salary. This was an issue we ran into when I worked for an independent research centre – the centre had very limited infrastructure money and grants could be used to pay support staff (such as research assistants, grants facilitator, etc.), but where to get the salary for the Research Associate who holds the grant was always a problem. Now, if these Research Associate positions were truly differentiated from PDFs, with the intent being that the Research Associate is a working scientist, but not one who seeks to have their own lab (and thus, doesn’t need to have their name on grants to get tenure), that would work… assuming the granting agencies agree to these higher paid (plus benefits) positions being a good use of the funds when you submit that budget.

Just another piece of the puzzle to think about.

By: SubC

SubC — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 20:33:39 +0000

This is a great article and it correctly highlights the need for more semi-permanent research positions aka Research Associates. To provide an improved status/ benefits of RAs, these positions must be separately identified from postdoc positions. A PDf is a training positions which should NOT last beyond 5-6 yrs, the RA positions would on teh other hand, be a proper “job” for a more senior researcher with a PhD who has no desire to have a lab of his/ her own. Actually, in my current lab there is a postdoc (an excellent scientist) who is right now transitioning into a “Research Associate” position, which is what she had been aiming for.
Also, there are now “Research Professor” positions being made available to senior research associates who would like to co-supervise grad students. The University of Calgary for one has recruited quite a few in the last few yrs. I am not sure whether these positions allow for being co-applicants on grants, but that would be a step in the right direction.

By: Marianne

Marianne — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:53:38 +0000

Hi all,

These ‘research scientist’ (aka research associate, research scientist, staff scientist etc) positions do exist in some form at nearly every Canadian Institution. The issue is that many PDFs aren’t offered the opportunity to enter into these positions, or they are simply not stable/competitive enough to foster the movement of PDFs from their postdoc (which they believe rightly or wrongly will lead to a better long term career) to these positions. I would require something better (read: better pay, benefits, and stability) than my current postdoc to move out of it to a research scientist position, even if it would allow me to keep doing science. I can do science in the private sector and be valued. Until Canadian Institutions VALUE those PhD’s who are not tenured professors, the academic parking lot will continue to grow.

My two cents.

By: Dave

Dave — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 10:48:31 +0000

Hi Cathy,

Research scientist definitely sounds like the type of thing I’d be describing and advocating for…

Is it possible to give us a sense of the following (you can email me if you’d rather not post it at contact@scienceadvocacy.org):
1) Are they competitive wages (i.e.: is it a reasonable “career choice”)
2) Are they transient or permanent? or at least how long is the typical contract for…?
3) Do they get employee status (i.e.: you pay into CPP, EI, and get a health plan)

I know these may end up being lab or institute specific but any information you could provide would be great. Your comment (and others from other people) is exactly what people need to know is out there and possible. Are these positions common across the country? I suspect some labs in Montreal, Vancouver, and Toronto have created these positions, but I have no idea of the frequency. Is it enough to start chipping away at the Academic Parking Lot or are people generally pushing full throttle (like your 2 friends) for professor positions and some make it and some don’t?

Does everyone in a second PDF want to be a professor???

By: Cathy

Cathy — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:00:54 +0000

These positions are available in Canada, at least in Vancouver. If you have been a PDF for 2 years or so (and been productive) and the lab has money, there is the opportunity to be a ‘research scientist’. I was in this position and several (at least 3) of my friends had this opportunity. However, 2 of the friends opted for another PDF in the hope that they would one day run their own lab.