“Science is a wonderful thing...

Even Albert Einstein was versed in the difficulties facing those who want a career in academic research. Those brave fools that, even in the face of riches proffered by industry, love research so much they are willing to attempt to climb the precipitous and slippery ladder that is UK academic science career progression.

A recent campaign by ‘Science is Vital’, a national gro up of concerned academics from professors to PhD students, last month created a consultation report that was presented to the Rt Hon David Willets, Minister for Universities and Science, highlighting their concerns about the UK science career system, that many fear is near breaking point. They recognised that obstacles are many, sacrifices plentiful and morale low, in a system that rewards the lucky few and stifles creativity and initiative, yet survives almost exclusively on the back-breaking work of early career scientists.

The bleak reality is, in a time of austerity, research councils and funding bodies are obsessed with short term, low risk projects with fast turnovers, meaning post-doctoral positions are brief, and poorly paid relative to other sectors, with extreme competition for the very few positions available. Some early career scientists may consequently seek international positions, resulting in a loss of intellect and skills in the UK. This forced mobility, combined with the quick turnover of contracts, means the chance of a normal life outside of work is slim, and those who want families and stability in their lives, especially women, face a very difficult time. Take a break from your career, and suffer the consequences – worst of all, those unable to gain a position within a few years of graduating from their PhD will find their experience useless and investment pointless, and pity the poor soul whose first post-doctoral project doesn’t produce any results. ‘Publications, publications, publications!’ is a mantra we are all very familiar with, and is a result of a system that rewards those who are lucky enough to find a PhD or post-doctoral project guaranteed with lots of high profile papers. Early career scientists are left bereft by a system that prevents them from pursuing their own research ideas, with research councils responding to current fiscal pressure from government by redirecting money away from early career scientist grants.

There are an ever increasing number of PhD students and post-docs who want to become research group leaders and laboratory managers, but never will do so due to static number of senior positions available in research institutions. Whilst this means cheap labour for current PIs, huge amounts of money and effort is wasted on training, and there is currently very little provision of positions suitable for those who do not want to write their own grants, but want to stay in research nonetheless. Shockingly, there is an 80% loss of all trained, skilled and enthusiastic people at each step of the career ladder, a level of attrition that is far from sustainable. There is additionally little provision of professional training for preparedness and skills relevant to alternative career paths in science but outside of the academic realm, due to the short-term nature of most contracts. Of course, there is little impetus to change a system that for senior scientists has worked and produces cheap labour, and the UK system, despite its foibles, is one of the most productive in the world.

Early career scientists are not idiots, and are, for the most part, aware of the risks associated with pursuing a career path fraught with this many obstacles. However, as recognised by ‘Science is Vital’, and indeed many academics, changes are required to restructure the system constructively. One solution could be the implementation of teaching fellowships at post-doctoral level with one or two years of teaching and outreach on top of research time, with external funding subsidised by university departments. This would increase contract length and stability, develop skills that would prepare individuals for other options in science related positions, and make them more employable in lectureship posts. A similar program for PhD students could result in longer programs over 4 or 5 years, with less PhD student numbers overall. The lack of international experience would be seen as detrimental if more post-docs stayed in the UK, but this could be countered by the development of more active mentoring and short-term career development opportunities with international institutions and collaborators. For example, the Worldwide University Trust serves as one such platform, but pro-active membership nationally is currently lacking. Other organisations such as the National Research Staff Association are taking active roles in reassessing the current research council funding system, with the recognition that more long term funded projects and more funding for early career scientists are required. Ultimately, grants should be based on a proposal’s scientific merit and not just the employment status or publication record of the early career scientist who wrote it.

Take home message time: for all you early career scientists, it’s a beautiful thing you do and wonderfully rewarding personally, but you have the power to help change the system that does not adequately recognise your hard work! Get involved in organisations such as ‘Science is Vital’, write to your local MP to express your concerns, and make active decisions to prepare yourself just in case it all goes wrong…