Tag Archives: EU

Employment rights in post-Brexit Britain

Posted on by

As the UK prepares to trigger Article 50, signalling its departure from the EU, opponents of Brexit worry that that employment rights will be eroded and the UK will become a less welcoming place, particularly for LGBT people.

sciencebrexit

A placard waved at the anti-Brexit demonstration, held in London on March 25 2017.

“Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves, First we’ll kick the Poles out, Then we’ll get the gays.”

Liberal democrat peer Liz Barker reminded a business summit on LGBT rights last week that the above chant was heard in London the day after the EU referendum in June 2016, and that in the three months following there was a 147% increase in reported homophobic crimes.

“Among the very many half-truths bandied about during the [referendum] campaign, the idea that the EU played very little or no parts in gaining rights in this country was most egregious,” she told The Economist’s Pride and Prejudice event, held in London, Hong Kong and New York on 23 March. Continue reading →

Mobility: How to prepare for working in Sweden

Posted on by
Reply

Make sure you’re prepared in advance if moving to Sweden for research, says Barry O’Brien.

Barry-OBrien-Naturejobs-blogBarry O’Brien is a careers advisor working for PhD Career link, in Sweden. In this Q&A I find out what it takes to make a smooth transition into Swedish life and research.

Why did you move to Sweden? 

I met a beautiful Swedish girl who dragged me to Stockholm with promises of clean air and open spaces. She forgot to mention the high taxes and expensive beer!

How do you help scientists in Sweden?

PhD Career Link was created to supply fresh ideas for job seekers looking to move from academia to industry. I am helping career centres to deliver interesting courses, workshops and events around the concept of personal branding – first impressions matter! I use LinkedIn, Facebook, Meetup and traditional tools like the good old CV, to improve applicant’s chances of both being found by, and finding recruiters.

What support is there for researchers based in Sweden?

Career support whilst researching comes from the University Career Centres and Unions, but unfortunately not every University has the resources to assist them.

In Sweden a PhD is a paid position, so now there are regulation changes happening that will mean that someone doing a PhD is considered employed and should fall under the ‘state employment’ rules – this means that they are not the responsibility of the University. Many student groups organise their own career events, inviting alumni, coaches and industry speakers. Continue reading →

Train ’em up and kick ’em out

Posted on by
Reply

Plans for non-EU graduate students to leave the UK, once their courses and visas have expired, have been halted.

In December 2014, Theresa May, the UK home secretary, proposed plans for “zero net student immigration” in the UK, arguing that this would be part of a fair immigration policy. The plans (initially set out in the Conservative Party Manifesto of 2010) stated that any non-EU student at a UK university would be required to leave the UK, immediately upon completion of their degree. Any universities and institutions failing to enforce this policy would be penalised. 

These plans have been halted, for now, due to resistance from the Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, with support from the former UK universities minister, David Willets, and inventor Sir James Dyson. They argue that the benefit to the UK economy, of attracting talented researchers from around the world, outweighs the negatives of increasing immigration.

The current rules stipulate that students have 4 months after graduation to apply for a graduate job that pays £24,000 per year. This looks set to remain the case for the time being, but it is unclear whether May’s plans have been buried completely or if they’ve just been delayed. Clearly this is a complex set of issues at a time when governments, on one hand, are being forced to control immigration to control public spending, and on the other hand recognise the need to import talent that not only supports the higher education “industry”, whose research-based innovation could drive economic growth.

We’re interested to hear from the Naturejobs readers about the potential impacts of this policy. So, please vote in our poll to let us know if you think this policy should go through and in the comments, please provide your reasons and answers to the questions below:

  • Are you a non-EU student in the UK? What was your experience of applying for a job here? Would a proposal like this make you think twice?
  • Are you a non-EU student thinking of coming to study in the UK? How would this proposal affect you?
  • Are you an existing UK or EU student studying in the UK? What do you think about this proposal?

Thanks!

 

A hit below the belt to Spanish science

Posted on by
Reply

In a report published last Thursday, the Spanish government released a sudden modification of the established rules pertaining to the financing of research projects sentencing the research community to more hardships.

Public funds are the main financing source that Spanish science relies on. These programs, which fund research projects as well as individual investigators (mostly young talented scientists starting their labs and returning from postdocs overseas) are granted every year and typically provide funds for projects spanning 3-to-5 years. In the present financial climate, the Spanish government has been continuously and drastically cutting funds for these programs.

In 2009 the Spanish government spent 547 million euros to support science. In the latest resolution of these programs, published last December, these funds were reduced to 309 million (a more than 40% reduction). Rubbing salt into the wound, these funds will also be significantly delayed according to the recent communication, which states that researchers will receive the funds in four years instead of the three that the original call had stipulated back in December 2011.

Making things even worse, the government has announced that during the first year, less than 10% of the funds will be made available to scientists. This is in direct contrast to previous resolutions, in which funds were administered following a 40% in year one, 40% in year two and 20% in year three formula that was deemed appropriate as projects typically require big investments in equipment and reagents during the first years.

In the past, it has been possible for universities or the CSIC (the Spanish National Research Council) to advance some of the funds to awardees, but now these institutions have no money to put forward.

This delay and changed formula for administration of funds will have a devastating effect on the vast majority of active Spanish scientists. In addition, the manner in which this new ‘rule’ has been communicated, late and by surprise, has angered a community of researchers that has already been particularly hit by the economic woes that the country is suffering.

During the 30 years before the 2008 crisis, Spanish research and development productivity had been steadily increasing and gaining visibility in the international community. Young investigators who had gone abroad to do science were returning to Spain aided by new grants and programs. Innovative, cutting-edge Spanish science was no longer a dream but a reality.

Since 2009, the Spanish government has been cutting science budgets relatively more than other areas (average ministries are experiencing cuts of 16%). It is clear that these cuts threaten to undermine the ability of scientific institutes across the country to hire and retain talented personnel. While Spain continues to reduce its support for research, other European countries and the European Union are proposing to increase their investment in science.

The Spanish science secretary Carmen Vela has proposed that Spanish scientists focus ‘on innovation and quality over quantity’ and that private funding of science should increase. But if policymakers continue to take measures that result in more labs closing down and the fleeing of scientists, there will be no talented people left in Spain to drive the innovation that will guarantee a sustainable economy in the future.

Links to other news coverage and political reactions to this resolution

https://sociedad.elpais.com/sociedad/2013/01/24/actualidad/1359061061_171675.html

https://www.abc.es/espana/20130126/abci-gobierno-reduce-ayudas-ciencia-201301261848.html

https://www.izquierda-unida.es/node/11697

Prioritizing ‘bottom-up’ investments in infrastructures, as well

Posted on by
Reply

In this month’s editorial we discuss the importance of prioritizing funds for researcher-originated projects, such as those supported by the European Research Council (ERC) over thematically-defined grants inEurope’s next program for research and innovation.

In addition to the ERC, another instrument that will be of critical importance for the competitiveness of Europe’s researchers is good access to world leading research infrastructures.

In 2002, the European Union set up the European Strategy Forum on Research Infrastructures (ESFRI), a group of senior science administrators who advise national governments and the European Commission on infrastructure needs. In 2006, the ESFRI released its first roadmap: a list of 35 infrastructure projects that the forum deemed to be of pan-European interest. This roadmap has been subsequently updated to include a total of 44 initiatives and after several years of financial support to the ‘preparatory’ phases, some of these projects are finally ready to enter the critical ‘realization phase’.

However, taking all 44-initiatives through the construction phase is estimated to cost the EU ten times more than the funds allocated to these projects under FP7. Horizon 2020’s proposed budget follows a similar trend.

To ensure that at least the most successful projects defined under ESFRI see the light of day, ESFRI needs more funds and more power to act.

As discussed in a prior editorial, the creation of the ESFRI was an important first step, but not enough, as the forum neither funds the projects nor sets explicit priorities among them. Following the model of the ERC, ESFRI should be given the autonomy to evaluate infrastructure projects on the basis of their scientific promise, prioritize them and, ultimately, to fund them.

The creation of such a ‘European Research Infrastructure Council’ should be accompanied by the necessary stimulus in funds so that successful projects make it through the realization phase and investments that have already been made can be fully exploited.