Subject: Science, Jobs, and disparaging remarks.

From: [email-masked] (Joe Landman)
Date: Sun, 26 Jun 94 09:52:43 EDT

Fellow Net.Landers:

   I read Mr Boehm's writing with much dismay.  He has one point 
which is actually valid, but never supported it in his writing.  THis
point is relevant to all sciences at this juncture, and it should
be addressed by all scientists.

   The point is, we have far too many new PhD's entering a shrinking
science and industrial marketplace.  This is the point that the YSN
is trying to disseminate amoung the scientific societies.  Mr Boehm
failed to give this point the time it deserved, writing instead some
quite inflammatory comments about who does and does not deserve a job.

   Back to the relevant point.  Whether people in the Chemical, Physical, or
engineering communities like it or not, we produce far too many people
to fill available positions.  We put these people into holding patterns
with soft money positions, 2 post docs, research professor (non-tenure
track).

   We must also face the fact that in the current market sceanario, this
funding and position situation is unlikely to change.  Rather, it is
likely to get worse.  This MUST be taken into account when taking on
new students.  Be upfront about the situation.  You will find the
most talented able students will remain, and the more pedestrian
students will not make plans for positions that they will likely never
obtain.

   I know this well, as I am going to finish up my PhD within the year,
and the job situation is so bad, I am giving serious consideration
to leaving science, and growing my fledgling computer consultancy.  That
is, I cannot see spending time (2-4 years) in a post-doc with no 
hope whatsoever of getting a tenure track position.  Aside from this
due to the extreme lack of science positions in industry, after a post-doc
there would be no place for me to go in an established organization.
Startup monies from SBIR and other places are not viable for my area,
and the likelyhood of my getting any are quite small.

   No one owes me a job, no one is displacing me, I just have a very 
tough decision to make.  However, there is a tough decision that the
established science must make.  What to do about this?  YSN is trying
to help by debating many possible solutions, and presenting the 
results of that debate to the scientific societies.  It is in every scientists
personal interest to aid in these discussions for the following reason.
If the governments decide that physical research (aside from medical related)
should not have public funding, or should be drastically reduced, how
many of you would no longer have money to do experiments, hire student
workers, etc?  Is this a possibility? Well, it would not be politically costly
for the people making the decisions, and it would free up a great deal
of money for their own pet projects...  Yeah... its quite possible.

   My point is, lets clean up our house, and fix the problems BEFORE
the governments decide to fix it themselves.  An old (Chinese?) story
I once heard about governments solving problems goes like this.
Two people go to the ruler and make their cases about why they are having
problems.  The ruler heaves a sigh and says "But if I kill you both
then I no longer have a problem, my problem being the settlement of
your problem"...  Let us not put our respective sciences into such
a predicament.  Help fix it, by participating in discussions with YSNers
about possible solutions.

   As I had said, this is very much related to science, Chemistry,
Physics, Engineering, etc.  The solution to the problem should be
posed and worked on internally.

(stepping off my soap box)

Joe Landman
[email-masked]
(new .sig under construction)

ps:  There are always a few people who deny that this problem exists.
I urge them to get their heads out of the proverbial sand and look around.
It is pervasive, and getting worse that it is now.