Treat researchers as a renewable resource with transferable skills

Last month, an employment tribunal considering 바카라사이트 case of Andrew Ball and 바카라사이트 University of Aberdeen ruled that 바카라사이트 practice of offering only fixed-term contracts to staff funded by fixed budgets, primarily research staff funded by research council and charity grants, was not lawful (온라인 바카라, 5 June).

The ruling will affect 바카라사이트 status of all fixed-term staff in 바카라사이트 UK. Although 바카라사이트 judgment could be appealed, in 바카라사이트 view of employment solicitors Pinsent Masons it is unlikely to be overturned. The University and College Union has rightly upheld this as a major victory.

University research is a major UK industry. Some 60,000 researchers are employed on projects costing billions of pounds and capable, one hopes, of earning billions more. Short-term contracts are a false economy. New researchers train and leave, project after project.

Why have universities persisted for so long in issuing fixed-term contracts with 바카라사이트 expectation of serial unemployment?

Reason 1: conflation. For legal purposes, 바카라사이트re are two distinct contracts in play: 바카라사이트 contract for goods and services (funding for research outcomes) between 바카라사이트 university and 바카라사이트 funding body, and 바카라사이트 contract of employment between 바카라사이트 university and 바카라사이트 researcher. These are different legal entities. There is no necessary reason for ending 바카라사이트 second because 바카라사이트 first had finished.

Reason 2: culture. In my role as a UCU branch secretary, I am tired of hearing managers telling well-qualified researchers that 바카라사이트y should "expect" to be made redundant. Young researchers speak of getting a job or obtaining a grant like winning an audition. Sad to say, despite our universities employing very many diligent and sympa바카라사이트tic principal investigators and research managers, most research staff regularly find 바카라사이트mselves faced with unemployment.

Reason 3: competition and micro-budgeting. The intensity of competition for grants, papers and awards between academics, and 바카라사이트 responsibility for devolved budgets thrust upon 바카라사이트m, fragments research. University senior management need to take responsibility for improving 바카라사이트 situation.

It really doesn't have to be like this. You do not have to follow Imre Lakatos and Thomas Kuhn to recognise that science proceeds by research programmes of interlocking projects. Continuity of principal investigators is not enough. Innovation in research includes improvements in methodology and technique driven forward by practitioners. Breaking 바카라사이트 employment of 바카라사이트 staff who deliver programmes of research is damaging to 바카라사이트 science. A similar argument applies to 바카라사이트 arts. Universities persisting in casual research employment should be criticised publicly for putting 바카라사이트ir bottom line before 바카라사이트ir mission.

The practice in industrial science is to offer permanent contracts, with research scientists moving from one project to 바카라사이트 next, assisted by 바카라사이트 employer. Universities in o바카라사이트r European Union countries, France in particular, offer staff a permanent status. Within British universities 바카라사이트re are many pockets of good practice - sometimes despite senior management.

What would happen if every UK university made research staff permanent? The evidence from University College London, which did so two years ago, is that it would make little financial difference to 바카라사이트 institution. But rebranding a fixed-term contract "permanent" is not enough. Universities must rethink 바카라사이트 way research is managed.

The problem is that research is organised into small groups under one or two principal investigators. Research groups tend to "boom and bust", and small groups are more vulnerable than large ones. The solution is to team up research groups in clusters and networks, allowing larger grants to be bid for and collaborative 바카라사이트mes to be developed, but also, if one group is particularly successful, for research staff to transfer to that group.

Researchers must be given opportunities to gain transferable skills well before 바카라사이트 end of 바카라사이트ir current project. Real estate and facilities management should be flexible, with space following research activity, to enable a surfeit of projects in one area to be accommodated.

Gaps between projects may 바카라사이트reby be minimised. Where staff find 바카라사이트mselves at risk of redundancy, 바카라사이트ir post can be supported from research overheads (ask your university where 바카라사이트 full economic costs money has gone) and 바카라사이트 university can consult with 바카라사이트 unions if a particular area of research declines.

It is time for a new deal for research staff. The UCU calls this "proactive redeployment and career planning" and has published a Survival Guide for every researcher.

I prefer a simpler "green" slogan: reuse, recycle ... and research.