Today Other New Postdoc mentioned that he knew of a lab where some post-docs were paid as much as $66K....and others as little as $42K. (Not that $42K is a bad post-doc salary--this is an HHMI lab, I believe; "little" refers only to the disparity in pay.) The difference was not due to seniority, but instead appeared to be a way for the PI to reward his favorite post-docs.
GradStudent opined that PIs should have the latitude to give merit raises to post-docs, and perhaps even grad students. "It's basic human nature," he said. "People will work harder if they can be rewarded for it."
Yeah, because what this whole science mess needs right now is more post-docs trying to put in 80 hour weeks (and feeling guilty when they fail).
I don't think merit pay is the right way to go. We're not in this for the cash prizes. The big reward, for many of us, is the coveted faculty job, and an opportunity to pursue our own obscure and nutty questions, rather than somebody else's.
Besides, as we're all aware, PIs do reward their favorite post-docs--by sending them to extra conferences, by mentoring them more, by publicizing their work more, etc etc. Do we really need to add insult to injury for the other lab members?
I get that people can negotiate, a bit, for their salaries. But usually you're working within set NIH limits. One post-doc earning 1.5x as her same-seniority colleague is just asking for trouble.
Although I don't think I would turn down $66K, either.
15 years ago
9 comments:
I think that loosely defined merit pay is a bad idea for all fields. However, I can see the full-time summer research appointment going to the extremely productive student who had a half time research appointment and did a lot within the time they were given. Whenever "merit" is loosely defined, it can become a way to perpetuate bias.
$66k?!? Sign me up.
I just posted the other day about my postdoc salary woes, but can't figure out how to link it.
Fortunately I can manage: Candid Engineer's thoughts on a living wage can be found here.
Is there no better health insurance for the two of you that doesn't involve $500/month? Doesn't your postdoc cover you? It's utterly shameful if it doesn't, and you should try to negotiate that somehow next time you have a nice graph (or whatever) in your hands...
Huh...I've never heard of pay differences for postdocs in my field based on merit (or PI favoritism, if one's a cynic). In my department, postdoc salaries vary wildly, but largely because of people having different fellowships, and because some of the "postdocs" are actually MD/PhD clinical fellows who have significantly higher salaries.
I've been thinking about this a bit because I'm just hiring my first postdoc(s). The easy part is health insurance and whatever - of *course* that's covered :). The more relevant part is that I was thinking of having essentially a bonus scheme per published paper (maybe [??] something like $1K per paper, $3K if it's in absolute top journal??)
Thoughts? Am I insane? Input actively sought!
Well, 75% of the health insurance cost is for my husband. My school subsidizes my health insurance pretty well, but not a partner's. That's where it really hurts. Hopefully this won't be a problem for much longer.
Ewan- I would probably find a $1k incentive for publishing a paper to be kind of weird. I myself am sufficiently motivated to publish without incentives... but even if I was to be persuaded by incentives, I don't think an extra $1k would do it.
I think the best approach is just to pay your postdoc a respectable salary to begin with (in the $40-42 range). In my limited experience, it seems that people who feel like they are being treated fairly feel more loyalty to their employer and are more likely to go above and beyond to do a good job.
Interesting little factoid... pay is the worst motivator for performance and public recognition is the best. (Before starting my PhD, I did a MS in business management-- yes an MS.) And the research (which I can't find the link to at this moment) shows that giving someone a crappy certificate or an announcement with a gift card to Outback is actually a better motivator than a big salary. Go figure.
I would also find "merit" pay weird... so much of science success is luck and not hard work that it hardly makes sense to see someone who already has the luck success also benefit from financial reward. Plus chances are that if you're publishing a good story you're getting sent to a conference to give a talk etc...
Ewan< I don't think the pay reward for published papers would be a happy for me. However, if I were to be taken out on a lab lunch or drinks with my PI saying "let's celebrate because X here got published!" then that would work as a booster for all in the lab...
Merit pay and differences in a lab based on the post docs. I don't know. I guess it should be sometihing called for "negotiatingyour salary" but it seems a little too much difference within one lab to have 42K and 66K.
that said, I would be extatic aobut getting 66K a year. My jolly gosh ;)
Post a Comment