The faculty series: Top 10 tips on negotiating start-up packages

Negotiating the best deal for your research is something few junior faculty members are prepared for. Here’s some friendly advice.

New faculty are often given a start-up fund by their new department, which is designed to be enough to cover equipment costs and other expenses before the grants start knocking on the door. The sum of the start-up isn’t set in stone, and this leads to a dreaded period of negotiation; the difficult and lengthy process that few junior faculty members are prepared for. Here, Naturejobs offers help and advice that any new faculty member should bear in mind when trying to get the best deal to carry out their research.

piggy bank

{credit}ImageSource{/credit}

1. Know what you need before beginning any dialogue

Before beginning any negotiation, make sure to know what you absolutely need to carry out your research. Whether this is a telescope, the latest interactive graphics package, a peptide sequencer or a good old-fashioned centrifuge, getting your essentials right will put you in the right position to begin negotiating.

2. There’s no point having equipment if you don’t have any hands to use it

One of the largest costs you can expect to come out of your start-up fund are the salaries of PhD students and postdocs. They’re the most crucial components of the lab for almost all researchers. These are also expensive and, unlike equipment, you have to keep paying for them. If you don’t have the hands available to do the science, all of the new shiny equipment in the world isn’t going to make a difference. Factor trainee costs into your budget. Continue reading

Mobility: Moving within Europe

EURAXESS representatives shared online resources and funding opportunities for those seeking to do science abroad

Contributor Ada Yee

If you’re a student seeking experiences abroad, a newly-minted PhD wanting work in industry-leading countries, or an academic looking to settle in Europe, start by typing “EURAXESS” into your Web browser.  During the Naturejobs Career Expo 2015 in Boston, Massachusetts, we heard from representatives of EURAXESS, a European Commission[https://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm] initiative designed to encourage researcher mobility and facilitate European research careers. The workshop showcased a range of funding opportunities and resources for researchers of all training levels and—although most attendees were European—all nationalities.

EURAXESS online resource community

For those just starting with their European job search, or for those navigating an overseas transition (including visa paperwork and finding a school for your kids), the session gave a guided tour of EURAXESS’s free-to-use online resource community.

Through the jobs section of the site, job seekers can access an online job portal and upload CVs for organizations’ perusal. So far, the site has collected more than 8,500 job ads, and about 8,000 organizations—including research institutions, universities, and companies—have registered to view CVs, noted Stephanie Jannin, one of EURAXESS’s North America regional representatives.

EURAXESS services also include centers dedicated to helping researchers and their families with the logistics of moving to Europe. Jannin described “a network of over 500 professionals working in over 200 offices across Europe.” Contact information for the centers is found in the services portion of EURAXESS’s site. Continue reading

Enough doom and gloom part 2: Curiosity is the currency of science

Science funding sources have varied over the decades, and will continue to do so as the sociological and political influences change, says Scott Chimileski.

Contributor Scott Chimileski

Twenty-first century science is global, rapidly communicated and irreversibly intertwined with virtually every aspect of society. This immensity creates the impression that our current scientific culture has been established for a very long time. However, the National Science Foundation (NSF), NASA and the Department of Energy (DOE), pillars of basic science that we recognize them to be, were all established after many of today’s senior investigators were born. In addition to appreciating the cyclical nature of funding (see part one), it is critical to consider how and why funding sources have changed throughout the history of science.

From the scientific revolution at the end of Renaissance through the 19th century, science was largely self-funded or driven by the patronage of other independently wealthy individuals. Many famous forefathers of science had side jobs. Antonie van Leeuwenhoek, whose observations of bacteria in the 17th century inspire microbiologists to this day, was a house manager. Little is known of how he made his microscopes, let alone exactly how he paid for supplies. His contemporary Robert Hooke, another pioneer of microbiology, was an architect and city surveyor. Johannes Kepler wrote horoscopes. And, Galileo Galilei – celebrated for early observations of Saturn’s shape and the Milky Way Galaxy – pitched his telescopes to the military of the Republic of Venice as naval instruments, and to the House of Medici in Florence as a means for naming distant moons after members of this powerful dynasty.

science-funding-inventors Continue reading

France Cordova voted NSF director

France Cordova is voted in as the new National Science Foundation (NSF) director: tackling the women in science and science funding debates head on.

France Cordova

{credit}MARK SIMONS, PURDUE UNIVERSITY{/credit}

Women in science. Not an easy topic to approach.

Funding in science. Another nasty.

What if you combined the two: a female astrophysicist takes on the starring role at one of the biggest science funders in the US?

Why not. Continue reading

This week on Nature Careers

“The disgruntlement is a by-product of how the review system works.”

Johan Bollen

Image courtesy: Johan Bollen

Says Johan Bollen in his Turning point interview. To receive grant funding, scientists have to act like contractors, and the system is extremely slow. So, Johan took things into his own hands, and he hopes to democratise science funding. His plan is that every scientist receiving a base amount of $100,000, and that they would have to divide this amongst they’re colleagues based on their scientific track record.

What do you think about this system? Do you think it will work as a good alternative to the current funding models? We would love to hear from you – leave a comment below and get the conversation started.

 

Finding a job in the fracking industry

Fracking

A fracking site in Williston, North Dakota. The state has suffered a housing shortage as a result of thousands of workers flocking to join the oil boom.{credit}Shannon Stapleton/Reuters/Corbis{/credit}

For a controversial industry, there do seem to be rather a lot of job openings. Geoscience: Fracking fundamentals looks at where the jobs are, and what they entail. The main problem that needs solving: how to get rid of the chemical waste water.

We’d love to hear from you if you work in the industry and have some advice for job seekers!