Graduate With Physics Phd, 31, Fell To His Death From Block Of Flats After Taking Job In Call Centre He Was Over-Qualified For

[iamnumerate]

Isn't the main issue that prior to the credit crunch all academic funding was in generous supply and now it is short supply. This led to lots of PhD courses being funded as well as other stuff.

Academia is an international jobs market with internationally portable qualifications (PhDs and peer reviewed papers) so any UK PhD grad is competing with others from other western countries in similar circumstances, and furthermore with those from developing countries still churning out PhDs who will take a lower standard of living to escape their own poverty - so the limited number of jobs they apply for end up being 80-hours per week at 25k promoting a senior professor's agenda - not really a scientists'job, rather a lab tech's job.

There seems to be a blood bath brewing in academia - I think there has been overpublishing and over-funding for a decade or maybe more, and those that feel the pain will not be the ones that reaped the earlier benefits.

Thoughts from any of our full time academic posters?

I am not an academic but I do have a Phd in chemistry. There was a job crisis before the credit crunch even 17 years ago I knew talented chemists with Phd

in polymer science who could not get a permanent job. Ironically my life has been the reverse of the rest of the country in the late 1990s I struggled

and now I am doing ok (mainly because I could see the bleak future in science, I want to personally hurt the people who persuaded others to study

science post 1999 when they must have known there weren't many job).

[Si1]

I am not an academic but I do have a Phd chemist. There was a job crisis before the credit crunch even 17 years ago I knew talented chemists with Phd

in polymer science who could not get a permanent job. Ironically my life has been the reverse of the rest of the country in the late 1990s I struggled

and now I am doing ok (mainly because I could see the bleak future in science, I want to personally hurt the people who persuaded others to study

science post 1999 when they must have known there weren't many job).

17 years ago was the blood bath in public funding following the LAST recession - I understand it took until the end of the 90s for an upswing, and then the 2000s was pretty lucrative

and I don't think the issue is one about PERMANENT jobs, it's one about ANY jobs right now

[iamnumerate]

17 years ago was the blood bath in public funding following the LAST recession - I understand it took until the end of the 90s for an upswing, and then the 2000s was pretty lucrative

and I don't think the issue is one about PERMANENT jobs, it's one about ANY jobs right now

The job crisis for chemistry Phds started 17 years ago but I don't think it ever went away. Even a few years ago people were struggling.

Don't forget people in academia can get jobs in industry and vice versa the job crisis came from lack of industrial jobs.

[Si1]

The job crisis for chemistry Phds started 17 years ago but I don't think it ever went away. Even a few years ago people were struggling.

Don't forget people in academia can get jobs in industry and vice versa the job crisis came from lack of industrial jobs.

fair enough, I don't know specifically about chemistry if the truth be told

[CrashedOutAndBurned]

I've known dozens of graduates that had to go for little more than McJobs, despite getting good degrees in real subjects from well ranked universities! I have cousins much older than me that just strolled into jobs with big blue chips in the 80s. When graduates would get one of traditional 'milkround' Graduate jobs the process of getting on in life was almost as simple as passing from O Level to A Level to Uni.

The statistic is now something like only 1 in 40 graduates lands these kinds of positions. When I've worked for larger companies that had such schemes there would be several THOUSAND applications for maybe 20 actual openings (and even then only paying £17-£20k) - and from what I could gather from graduate trainees it seems to be successful it was more important to be hyperbubbly and enthusiastic rather than intelligent or competent. So thousands are going to fall through the net every year - some with 40, 50, 60K debts round their neck.

If that's not depressing I don't know what is.

[iamnumerate]

fair enough, I don't know specifically about chemistry if the truth be told

Thank you for your response people changing their mind on hpc after hearing the facts - is a rare event.

I don't know the exact situation for physics now but I do know that for graduates in 1995 it was pretty poor because I knew some.

[iamnumerate]

I've known dozens of graduates that had to go for little more than McJobs, despite getting good degrees in real subjects from well ranked universities! I have cousins much older than me that just strolled into jobs with big blue chips in the 80s. When graduates would get one of traditional 'milkround' Graduate jobs the process of getting on in life was almost as simple as passing from O Level to A Level to Uni.

The statistic is now something like only 1 in 40 graduates lands these kinds of positions. When I've worked for larger companies that had such schemes there would be several THOUSAND applications for maybe 20 actual openings (and even then only paying £17-£20k) - and from what I could gather from graduate trainees it seems to be successful it was more important to be hyperbubbly and enthusiastic rather than intelligent or competent. So thousands are going to fall through the net every year - some with 40, 50, 60K debts round their neck.

If that's not depressing I don't know what is.

Even more depressing is that schools want more people to do this!!!

[SHERWICK]

The job crisis for chemistry Phds started 17 years ago but I don't think it ever went away. Even a few years ago people were struggling.

Don't forget people in academia can get jobs in industry and vice versa the job crisis came from lack of industrial jobs.

Aren't these chemistry (and physics) graduates in demand abroad?

[Frank Hovis]

Aren't these chemistry (and physics) graduates in demand abroad?

Are pure science graduates, and especially PhDs, in demand anywhere? IMO governments blur the lines between engineering in all its forms (employable but on not great salaries in the UK) and science which is only as useful to employers as arts degrees as it shows a good measure of intelligence.

[SHERWICK]

Are pure science graduates, and especially PhDs, in demand anywhere? IMO governments blur the lines between engineering in all its forms (employable but on not great salaries in the UK) and science which is only as useful to employers as arts degrees as it shows a good measure of intelligence.

If these grads and post grads are not in demand anywhere on the world, then why are they (some of them adults) doing these degrees?

And if they are in demand somewhere in the world, why dont they move there for work?

[Dorkins]

If these grads and post grads are not in demand anywhere on the world, then why are they (some of them adults) doing these degrees?

Scientific research can be like art in many ways: creative freedom, passion for the subject, the excitement of doing something novel and unexpected. Many people do science for intellectual pleasure.

[SHERWICK]

Scientific research can be like art in many ways: creative freedom, passion for the subject, the excitement of doing something novel and unexpected. Many people do science for intellectual pleasure.

OK, I can understand that, but then they cannot complain when they don't get jobs anywhere in the world - it's hardly the UK's/Thatcher's/Cameron's or anyone's fault.

Is there any solution to this?

[Goat]

Are pure science graduates, and especially PhDs, in demand anywhere?

From the little that I know at graduate level yes, not in their chosen field but most employers regard these kind of degrees as a mark of quality so they stand a good chance of getting a graduate level job.

The problem is that by the time you've got your PhD the employers aren't interested anymore. If you can't get a job as a physicist then you're screwed.

[iamnumerate]

If these grads and post grads are not in demand anywhere on the world, then why are they (some of them adults) doing these degrees?

And if they are in demand somewhere in the world, why dont they move there for work?

For the same reason that people bought PPI the people who advised them (the professors) are the people who need new Phd degrees.

Also some people do it because they can't find a job.

Some people do move abroad I would have done if I had a found a job somewhere.

I think a lot of people go to uni because they are misadvised to by the Government and their teachers.

[iamnumerate]

From the little that I know at graduate level yes, not in their chosen field but most employers regard these kind of degrees as a mark of quality so they stand a good chance of getting a graduate level job.

The problem is that by the time you've got your PhD the employers aren't interested anymore. If you can't get a job as a physicist then you're screwed.

Not true I got into IT because someone who interviewed me was very impressed by my Phd. I am not sure if I was lucky or not because

I don't know anyone else who was in my situation.

[Dorkins]

OK, I can understand that, but then they cannot complain when they don't get jobs anywhere in the world - it's hardly the UK's/Thatcher's/Cameron's or anyone's fault.

Is there any solution to this?

I agree with you that PhDs have no right to expect a job any more than anybody else. There is no point in being able to provide a service that nobody demands.

In terms of solutions, there are simply too many people taking PhDs. You will not be surprised to hear that the number of government funded PhD places doubled under Labour. Some PhD students are the driven and talented ones for whom a non-research job would probably be society's loss, but a large number are ordinary young plodders who are not especially suited to research and who are basically spillover from the general youth unemployment problem. The latter should be pushed out of research sooner by reducing the number of PhD places and raising admission standards.

As with Bachelors and Masters degrees, PhDs are being swamped by young people trying to avoid Britain's persistent youth unemployment problem by extending their education.

[iamnumerate]

I agree with you that PhDs have no right to expect a job any more than anybody else. There is no point in being able to provide a service that nobody demands.

In terms of solutions, there are simply too many people taking PhDs. You will not be surprised to hear that the number of government funded PhD places doubled under Labour. Some PhD students are the driven and talented ones for whom a non-research job would probably be society's loss, but a large number are ordinary young plodders who are not especially suited to research and who are basically spillover from the general youth unemployment problem. The latter should be pushed out of research sooner by reducing the number of PhD places and raising admission standards.

As with Bachelors and Masters degrees, PhDs are being swamped by young people trying to avoid Britain's persistent youth unemployment problem by extending their education.

The problem is that university research depends upon Phd's unless industry recruits them afterwards it is like a pyramid scheme.

But without Phd students research would cost more because you would have to employ people with Phds who would of course become more

expensive as there would be less of them!!!

[Dorkins]

The problem is that university research depends upon Phd's unless industry recruits them afterwards it is like a pyramid scheme.

But without Phd students research would cost more because you would have to employ people with Phds who would of course become more

expensive as there would be less of them!!!

I know this is the conventional view of academia, but I don't think it tells the whole story. PhD students are not actually very productive because they are inexperienced. Although their labour costs are higher, postdocs produce a lot more data per man-year so the cost of generating data may actually be lower using postdocs rather than PhD students.

Professors are constrained by the funding bodies, and if it's easier to get funding for two PhD students than to keep an experienced postdoc on, that's what will happen. Reforming the academic research career structure will only happen when the funding bodies make it happen.

The funding bodies should only be providing enough PhD studentships to meet the demand for people with PhDs in academia and industry. At the moment they are massively overproducing.

[iamnumerate]

I know this is the conventional view of academia, but I don't think it tells the whole story. PhD students are not actually very productive because they are inexperienced. Although their labour costs are higher, postdocs produce a lot more data per man-year so the cost of generating data may actually be lower using postdocs rather than PhD students.

Professors are constrained by the funding bodies, and if it's easier to get funding for two PhD students than to keep an experienced postdoc on, that's what will happen. Reforming the academic research career structure will only happen when the funding bodies make it happen.

The funding bodies should only be providing enough PhD studentships to meet the demand for people with PhDs in academia and industry. At the moment they are massively overproducing.

Good point. Although what I said was a rehash of something printed recently in chemistry world.

[Saver]

Isn't the main issue that prior to the credit crunch all academic funding was in generous supply and now it is short supply. This led to lots of PhD courses being funded as well as other stuff.

Academia is an international jobs market with internationally portable qualifications (PhDs and peer reviewed papers) so any UK PhD grad is competing with others from other western countries in similar circumstances, and furthermore with those from developing countries still churning out PhDs who will take a lower standard of living to escape their own poverty - so the limited number of jobs they apply for end up being 80-hours per week at 25k promoting a senior professor's agenda - not really a scientists'job, rather a lab tech's job.

There seems to be a blood bath brewing in academia - I think there has been overpublishing and over-funding for a decade or maybe more, and those that feel the pain will not be the ones that reaped the earlier benefits.

Thoughts from any of our full time academic posters?

the academic job market is dire - even if you are very good, there's another 30-40 people who are just as good after the same 2-3 jobs that come up each year.

For new PhD's the situation is bad too because the post-docs can't move into academic jobs, whilst at the same time many have permanent contracts now due to changes in employment law so a lot less entry level postdocs are available.

On the other hand good PhD students seem to get jobs in industry very easily, and many choose this because they see how bad the academic job market is. The not so good second tier ones struggle though from what I can tell - which is why we should not have doubled the number of PhD places.

This in particle physics, which I think requires a certain combination of skills a lot of people want (technical skills in programming, stats and maths + working in a huge collaboration of thousands which works a lot differently to what goes on elsewhere in academia) - for other areas of physics I am not so sure its easy to get a job in industry.

[The Ayatollah Buggeri]

Spending another four years with the hard slog of a PhD (I didn't do one but did a research masters) would make it worse again as it makes you if anything less employable outside your specialist field, so all that work counts for literally less than nothing when it comes to getting unrelated employment.

Unless you've built a career in unrelated employment alongside it.

Throughout the 3.5 years of my PhD in modern history, I worked as a part-time cinema manager and projectionist alongside it (following in my parents' footsteps, who both worked in film distribution and exhibition), and then full-time in that biz for two years afterwards until I got my first university job. This was between 1996-99, and even then it was well understood that only a small proportion of PhD grads would end up in an academic career.

Another issue here is that I suspect that many PhD graduates are rather picky about where they will and won't work. My first post-PhD academic job was in a former polytechnic in the north-east of England. Only eight applied, and two were interviewed (I later found out). The other one was initially offered the job, but when she asked if she could have all her teaching and meetings crammed into two consecutive days and work at home from Berkshire on the other three and was told no, replied that it would be a snowy day in August before she'd move to Middlesbrough, and turned the offer down. They then offered it to me, and I was willing to relocate there (from Exeter). Five years at the coal face later (or more accurately for Teesside, iron ore face), I'd built up the teaching and publications record needed for a serious shot at a permanent job in a Russell Group institution, and got one (though that required another long-distance relocation).

I wonder how many early career academics who complain at not having one were unwilling to make the effort as described above?

[Dorkins]

I wonder how many early career academics who complain at not having one were unwilling to make the effort as described above?

A senior postdoc in my lab has been pursuing lectureships at less conventionally prestigious universities. His impression is that there are many people chasing these jobs right now, and these universities know it.

[The Ayatollah Buggeri]

A senior postdoc in my lab has been pursuing lectureships at less conventionally prestigious universities. His impression is that there are many people chasing these jobs right now, and these universities know it.

I'm not surprised fhat people are more willing to do this now than they were in 1999-2001 (when I was on the first post-PhD job circuit). That having been said, even at that time, I was amazed at the number of my colleagues who both complained of bleak job prospects yet at the same time were totally unwilling even to contemplate relocating beyond commuting distance from their current home.

[Dorkins]

I'm not surprised fhat people are more willing to do this now than they were in 1999-2001 (when I was on the first post-PhD job circuit). That having been said, even at that time, I was amazed at the number of my colleagues who both complained of bleak job prospects yet at the same time were totally unwilling even to contemplate relocating beyond commuting distance from their current home.

I expect a significant difference between then and now is that PhDs under 40 who are not yet lecturers will probably rent privately so feel less attached to their current home.