Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Please don't blame your colleagues (or yourself) for the fact that we live in a society and a time period in which corporations and academic institutions expect employees to work long hours that leave little time for work-life balance, but to be paid for a work week that is 35-40 hours on paper. That pretense is how many companies have managed to achieve record productivity and profits while unemployment remains high. I'm sure employers are delighted when they see employees fighting among themselves, instead of cooperating to push for better working conditions for all, and for government policies that help workers and families as much as they benefit employers and investors. Dawn Stover Dawn Stover Independent Writer Editor 1208 Snowden Road White Salmon, WA 98672 tel: 509 493 3652 email: dsto...@hughes.net web: www.dawnstover.com Contributing Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Contributing Editor, Popular Science
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Along this vein, Please remember that we are role models to our students both undergraduate and graduate. More and more they are turned off by the lack of balance that we show regardless of our gender: social life/family OR work. We should keep in mind that in our role as educators we teach just as much as by example as when we are formally teaching our courses. Emma Creaser Assoc Prof. Marine Physiology Unity College Unity, Maine From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Dawn Stover [dsto...@hughes.net] Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 10:59 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards Please don't blame your colleagues (or yourself) for the fact that we live in a society and a time period in which corporations and academic institutions expect employees to work long hours that leave little time for work-life balance, but to be paid for a work week that is 35-40 hours on paper. That pretense is how many companies have managed to achieve record productivity and profits while unemployment remains high. I'm sure employers are delighted when they see employees fighting among themselves, instead of cooperating to push for better working conditions for all, and for government policies that help workers and families as much as they benefit employers and investors. Dawn Stover Dawn Stover Independent Writer Editor 1208 Snowden Road White Salmon, WA 98672 tel: 509 493 3652 email: dsto...@hughes.net web: www.dawnstover.com Contributing Editor, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists Contributing Editor, Popular Science
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I don't get it. The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up in arms about it. Maybe I missed something? M On Sat, Jul 6, 2013 at 7:52 PM, Daniel Nidzgorski dnid...@gmail.com wrote: As an early-career ecologist who's male and childless by choice, I'm definitely not the target demographic for the birth/adoption portion of the CLB -- and yet I'm going to benefit a LOT from it. It's already been pointed out that helping cover employees' or collaborators' absences benefits the project and everyone involved with it. We're also going to have more amazing scientists of all different stripes stay in the profession, which is another major benefit to all of us and to advancing our scientific knowledge. I'm also going to benefit directly, albeit a little further down the line. This effort is an important stepping-stone towards a scientific culture that respects and supports a wide range of career-life balance needs. Cultural shifts are a gradual process, with lots and lots of little steps over time adding up to some astoundingly big changes. This particular funding is the opening piece of a much larger Career-Life Balance Program that's already going beyond just kids, and will continue to expand its scope (especially if we keep pushing it to...). This is NSF putting its money where its mouth is, saying that we need to start valuing the fact that scientists are human, too. This is pushing back against the professors who still feel perfectly justified to say in public that it's better not to hire employees or take on students who might have kids in the near future -- and all the quiet or subconscious biases that agree with them. In doing so, it paves the way for us to build on these changes so all of our life choices are valued, working towards a scientific culture where it's normal and expected that one's career makes space to have a life (not just to have kids). We're going to see more people taking leave for having kids, for caring for relatives, etc -- and we won't see the sky fall. We'll watch this happen again and again until the firsthand empirical evidence finally overcomes our preconceived notions. And that will make it much easier for someone like me to say I need some flexibility for something major in life, too, and the sky won't fall then, either. Every time there's proactive support for some specific target demographic or another, there's a cry of reverse discrimination. It only looks like that because there's currently discrimination against (real or perceived) family-related needs -- but we don't call that out as discrimination, we call it normal. Best, Daniel Daniel Nidzgorski Ph.D. Candidate NSF Graduate Research Fellow Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior University of Minnesota-Twin Cities -- Malcolm L. McCallum Department of Molecular Biology and Biochemistry School of Biological Sciences University of Missouri at Kansas City Managing Editor, Herpetological Conservation and Biology Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive - Allan Nation 1880's: There's lots of good fish in the sea W.S. Gilbert 1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss, and pollution. 2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction MAY help restore populations. 2022: Soylent Green is People! The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi) Wealth w/o work Pleasure w/o conscience Knowledge w/o character Commerce w/o morality Science w/o humanity Worship w/o sacrifice Politics w/o principle Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I think it was a single person who objected to it, the rest seems to be far more supportive. Kim On 7/6/2013 11:25 PM, malcolm McCallum wrote: I don't get it. The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up in arms about it. Maybe I missed something? M
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I agree. Malcom you may have missed the undercurrent to this topic that swirls around tender issues that have nothing to do with the NSF program; gender discrimination, reverse discrimination, personal choices, culture shifts. My interests are in the consideration given to the divergent paths of kids and career. The OP's opposition has provided a forum, but I'm not hearing much opposition beyond that. Michael -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Kim van der Linde Sent: Sunday, July 07, 2013 9:19 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards I think it was a single person who objected to it, the rest seems to be far more supportive. Kim On 7/6/2013 11:25 PM, malcolm McCallum wrote: I don't get it. The NSF puts together a program to help folks out, and people are up in arms about it. Maybe I missed something? M
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Aaron - you speak out of complete ignorance. First - there still is bias in the ivory tower wrt pay. Men with a family still may get better pay raises because they need the money because they are supporting a family, while women in some instances are still told that they are only providing supplemental income. This despite that the woman may be divorced; there is still an (often wrong) assumption that divorced women are getting support from their ex-spouses. Imagine having your job, having to take care of children, and being single, whether man (there are some in that situation) or women (many more women in that situation). Everyone wants to have a life and everyone needs to feed, clothe, and house themselves and so have to take care of the corresponding chores that go along with taking care of basic needs. (Do you really think clothes start to wash themselves just because you have children? Quite the opposite occurs, of course, all the basic chores multiply in size and time consumption.) You have no concept of how time consuming children are, in addition to the increased feeding/ cooking, clothes washing, and general cleaning requirements. In the beginning, kids just take time, tons and tons of time, all too often in the middle of the night. So anyone with young children is running on little to no sleep either sometimes or regularly, and job demands do not adjust accordingly. Then there is schooling. In some places just finding a school takes time, research, appointments, testing (yes, even to get into pre-school requires testing in some cities). Once the kids are in school, it may shock you but kids need help with homework. In fact, for my kids, we were required to do edits on their papers when they were in elementary and middle school. I doubt that requirement is unusual. And any school project needs planning and usually shopping for supplies, not to mention the not so occasional third and fourth hand during gluing. Then, unless you want your kid to be babysat by the TV, there's activities to be gone to (varies by kid's inclinations, but includes sports, ballet or gymnastics or art or...you name it, kids are doing it). These again take time, carpooling, watching, encouraging (all kids need encouragement and advising), and more shopping for equipment or uniforms or... something associated with activities. On top of those time demands, children need emotional nurturing, advising, loving, and just being with. Children are not emotionally nurtured from the other end of a computer screen while you write you next paper, grant or book. Nurturing takes face to face interaction, and dedicated time, at least some time daily until they are on their own. For many women, the decision comes down to where they want to spend their time. Is it more important to fight an uphill battle within the system and have less time for your family, or is it more important to raise the next generation in a country that poorly supports families (unlike most European countries, at least), often in isolation from a familial support network since we go where the jobs are and rarely find jobs close to the family home. For us, our family and our jobs must be our life for the two decades or so that we raise children. Having a life is something we can resume once we are empty nesters. Diane Henshel Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:58, Amanda Newsom ajnew...@ucdavis.edu wrote: I hesitate to respond to stuff like this on Ecolog, but must voice my support of Alia and Emily. It is NOT easier to have a family than to be single in academia. I say this as a childless, single person. My colleagues with families face challenges of the sort I simply do not, and particularly women with families face discrimination in addition to the discrimination they face just being women. Again, while having a family within academia is something I have not experienced, it is an issue that is close to my heart because I have seen very negative consequences to the status quo of NOT affording extra consideration to those academics with families. I have seen it lose the academy excellent people, particularly women, when small changes could have helped retain them. In this age, in this political climate, the academy needs to increase its intellectual capital, not continue to drive it away. On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Alia T alia.ts...@gmail.com wrote: So an attempt to correct the institutionalized discrimination against women in professional positions having children is discrimination against child-free people? Then I suppose you can extend the argument that being single with no children is a decision you've made with full knowledge of its potential negative effects on your career. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
And lets not forget the alarming large percentage of single mothers out there. They are doing all of it. I think the NSF should consider those women who have no help whatsoever.. Out of choice or desperation - it Dosent matter.. For that matter.. Single fathers should have the same benefit. Lets face it guys - today's world songs a different song. We have a lot of single parents out there and that cannot be gone unnoticed. Because the realty in today's world is a 'single parent'. We need to do something to aid these people, if we want the population to stay here in fifty years that is. Thanks Raj Kamthe On Jul 6, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Joos, Cara (MU-Student) cj...@mail.missouri.edu wrote: Isn't the issue here really simply that, generally, (I realize there are same sex couples and single parents but lets set that aside for now) one man and one woman choose to have children. The woman should not have a disproportionately more negative effect on her career than the man. This gets away from singles vs married and kids vs no kids. Whether, in general, people with children should be expected to perform at the same level as people without children is a different topic. This is about making sure women are not left behind because of the physical demands of pregnancy and breast feeding etc. There will never be equality in academia without addressing this unavoidable reality. Cara Joos PhD University of Missouri Biological Sciences 105 Tucker Hall Columbia, MO 65211 cj...@mizzou.edumailto:cj...@mizzou.edu On Jul 6, 2013, at 2:40 PM, David L. McNeely mcnee...@cox.netmailto:mcnee...@cox.net wrote: I assume you are not serious. What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employment climate. PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees.David McNeely David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.commailto:d...@fuzzo.com wrote: What other choices that might compete with their professional career, would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other choices invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.commailto:d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- David McNeely
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I agree.. I do not have any children.. Because I can't afford the time for them. Kudos to the parents who do it. It is a lot of work.. I have friend with children and it exhausts me everytime just to see the astronomical effort that goes into it. Europe is much friendlier to having children. Wish it was the case here as well.. It's about time. People without children just cannot claim they know what it's like. Raj Kamthe On Jul 7, 2013, at 4:37 AM, Dhenshel dhens...@gmail.com wrote: Aaron - you speak out of complete ignorance. First - there still is bias in the ivory tower wrt pay. Men with a family still may get better pay raises because they need the money because they are supporting a family, while women in some instances are still told that they are only providing supplemental income. This despite that the woman may be divorced; there is still an (often wrong) assumption that divorced women are getting support from their ex-spouses. Imagine having your job, having to take care of children, and being single, whether man (there are some in that situation) or women (many more women in that situation). Everyone wants to have a life and everyone needs to feed, clothe, and house themselves and so have to take care of the corresponding chores that go along with taking care of basic needs. (Do you really think clothes start to wash themselves just because you have children? Quite the opposite occurs, of course, all the basic chores multiply in size and time consumption.) You have no concept of how time consuming children are, in addition to the increased feeding/ cooking, clothes washing, and general cleaning requirements. In the beginning, kids just take time, tons and tons of time, all too often in the middle of the night. So anyone with young children is running on little to no sleep either sometimes or regularly, and job demands do not adjust accordingly. Then there is schooling. In some places just finding a school takes time, research, appointments, testing (yes, even to get into pre-school requires testing in some cities). Once the kids are in school, it may shock you but kids need help with homework. In fact, for my kids, we were required to do edits on their papers when they were in elementary and middle school. I doubt that requirement is unusual. And any school project needs planning and usually shopping for supplies, not to mention the not so occasional third and fourth hand during gluing. Then, unless you want your kid to be babysat by the TV, there's activities to be gone to (varies by kid's inclinations, but includes sports, ballet or gymnastics or art or...you name it, kids are doing it). These again take time, carpooling, watching, encouraging (all kids need encouragement and advising), and more shopping for equipment or uniforms or... something associated with activities. On top of those time demands, children need emotional nurturing, advising, loving, and just being with. Children are not emotionally nurtured from the other end of a computer screen while you write you next paper, grant or book. Nurturing takes face to face interaction, and dedicated time, at least some time daily until they are on their own. For many women, the decision comes down to where they want to spend their time. Is it more important to fight an uphill battle within the system and have less time for your family, or is it more important to raise the next generation in a country that poorly supports families (unlike most European countries, at least), often in isolation from a familial support network since we go where the jobs are and rarely find jobs close to the family home. For us, our family and our jobs must be our life for the two decades or so that we raise children. Having a life is something we can resume once we are empty nesters. Diane Henshel Sent from my iPad On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:58, Amanda Newsom ajnew...@ucdavis.edu wrote: I hesitate to respond to stuff like this on Ecolog, but must voice my support of Alia and Emily. It is NOT easier to have a family than to be single in academia. I say this as a childless, single person. My colleagues with families face challenges of the sort I simply do not, and particularly women with families face discrimination in addition to the discrimination they face just being women. Again, while having a family within academia is something I have not experienced, it is an issue that is close to my heart because I have seen very negative consequences to the status quo of NOT affording extra consideration to those academics with families. I have seen it lose the academy excellent people, particularly women, when small changes could have helped retain them. In this age, in this political climate, the academy needs to increase its intellectual capital, not continue to drive it away. On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 8:11 AM, Alia T alia.ts...@gmail.com wrote: So an attempt to
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
What other choices that might compete with their professional career, would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other choices invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I assume you are not serious. What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employment climate. PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees.David McNeely David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.com wrote: What other choices that might compete with their professional career, would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other choices invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- David McNeely
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
As an early-career ecologist who's male and childless by choice, I'm definitely not the target demographic for the birth/adoption portion of the CLB -- and yet I'm going to benefit a LOT from it. It's already been pointed out that helping cover employees' or collaborators' absences benefits the project and everyone involved with it. We're also going to have more amazing scientists of all different stripes stay in the profession, which is another major benefit to all of us and to advancing our scientific knowledge. I'm also going to benefit directly, albeit a little further down the line. This effort is an important stepping-stone towards a scientific culture that respects and supports a wide range of career-life balance needs. Cultural shifts are a gradual process, with lots and lots of little steps over time adding up to some astoundingly big changes. This particular funding is the opening piece of a much larger Career-Life Balance Program that's already going beyond just kids, and will continue to expand its scope (especially if we keep pushing it to...). This is NSF putting its money where its mouth is, saying that we need to start valuing the fact that scientists are human, too. This is pushing back against the professors who still feel perfectly justified to say in public that it's better not to hire employees or take on students who might have kids in the near future -- and all the quiet or subconscious biases that agree with them. In doing so, it paves the way for us to build on these changes so all of our life choices are valued, working towards a scientific culture where it's normal and expected that one's career makes space to have a life (not just to have kids). We're going to see more people taking leave for having kids, for caring for relatives, etc -- and we won't see the sky fall. We'll watch this happen again and again until the firsthand empirical evidence finally overcomes our preconceived notions. And that will make it much easier for someone like me to say I need some flexibility for something major in life, too, and the sky won't fall then, either. Every time there's proactive support for some specific target demographic or another, there's a cry of reverse discrimination. It only looks like that because there's currently discrimination against (real or perceived) family-related needs -- but we don't call that out as discrimination, we call it normal. Best, Daniel Daniel Nidzgorski Ph.D. Candidate NSF Graduate Research Fellow Ecology, Evolution, and Behavior University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
NSF is not terribly concerned with the furtherance of science. If they were, many many policies would be drastically different, including: 1) They would forbid any institution from being eligible for NSF funds who engages in spousal hiring or any other form of nepotism. Usage of any funding to hire based on marital status (and to whom) rather than purely on CV content/merit is wasteful and counter to the furtherance of science. 2) The NSF would also mandate that any NSF- or federal-funding eligible (or even accredited) institution was required to allow their postdocs and staff scientists (at LEAST any PhD-holding scientist) to submit grants with themselves as PI, sole PI if they wish. As it stands now, a combination of institutional and agency policies (tons of buck passing on this one as far as where the root of the problem lies) currently forbid many (most?) of the best and brightest scientists in the US from being PI of their own grants, or even owning publication/patent/grantwriting rights to their own ideas/intellectual property or work. 3) The NSF would also consider doing away with all postdoc positions all together, and pressure institutions to hire many more independent scientists and permanent staff scientists. 4) The NSF would create a robust and safe grievance/whistle blower system for graduate students and postdocs to report unethical or otherwise bad treatment or intellectual property theft at the hands of their faculty bosses. They would also have a system to evaluate grant submitters based on their MENTORING as robust as how they evaluate research - and reject grants by poorly rated mentors. 5) They would have a working group taking a long hard look at tenure and whether it is still relevant or if it is largely abused and needs done away with or replaced with a better system not as easily abused and more based on protecting controversy rather than protecting lack of productivity, employee abuse or IP theft. ... many other things they would do if they CARED about science, but the above would be a fantastic start. On 7/6/2013 3:40 PM, David L. McNeely wrote: I assume you are not serious. What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employment climate. PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees.David McNeely David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.com wrote: What other choices that might compete with their professional career, would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other choices invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan --
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Isn't the issue here really simply that, generally, (I realize there are same sex couples and single parents but lets set that aside for now) one man and one woman choose to have children. The woman should not have a disproportionately more negative effect on her career than the man. This gets away from singles vs married and kids vs no kids. Whether, in general, people with children should be expected to perform at the same level as people without children is a different topic. This is about making sure women are not left behind because of the physical demands of pregnancy and breast feeding etc. There will never be equality in academia without addressing this unavoidable reality. Cara Joos PhD University of Missouri Biological Sciences 105 Tucker Hall Columbia, MO 65211 cj...@mizzou.edumailto:cj...@mizzou.edu On Jul 6, 2013, at 2:40 PM, David L. McNeely mcnee...@cox.netmailto:mcnee...@cox.net wrote: I assume you are not serious. What people who find fault with NSF doing this fail to acknowledge is that NSF is responsible for the furtherance of science. Projects suffer when participants must be away for family matters. So science suffers, and NSF money goes to waste. By providing PIs small grants to temporarily replace workers who must be away for family reasons, NSF is salvaging its projects. I assume that PIs have hiring and firing authority. Being absent for recreational reasons and letting the project suffer would in my mind justify replacement of such personnel. That shouldn't be hard to do in today's employment climate. PIs may be faced with an institutional family leave policy that requires that they provide time off for family reasons (which is a legitimate institutional policy -- it helps retain employees in which the institution may have valuable training invested). This policy provides for PIs to work around the difficulty to projects that that might cause. NSF seems to be responding to a need among grantees.David McNeely David M. Lawrence d...@fuzzo.commailto:d...@fuzzo.com wrote: What other choices that might compete with their professional career, would warrant such an opportunity, Michael? The proposal here looks a bit half (if that) baked. Few other choices invoke such a huge emotional, financial -- and LEGAL -- burden as parenthood. Being a caregiver for old or ailing relatives might certainly warrant such treatment, but let's say your choice is scuba diving (a choice I am afflicted with). It is a personal choice, it involves costs in terms of money and time -- and if done enough, could interfere with my professional career. So should I be eligible for NSF help to help with my recreational diving habit? [For the sake of argument, let's ignore the fact that my dissertation is focusing on coral reefs and will involve some diving.] Dave On 7/4/2013 10:47 PM, Michael Clary wrote: We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -- -- David M. Lawrence| Home: (804) 559-9786 6467 Hanna Drive | Cell: (804) 305-5234 Mechanicsville, VA 23111 | Email: d...@fuzzo.commailto:d...@fuzzo.com USA | http: http://fuzzo.com -- All drains lead to the ocean. -- Gill, Finding Nemo We have met the enemy and he is us. -- Pogo No trespassing 4/17 of a haiku -- Richard Brautigan -- David McNeely
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
To be fair, it includes people caring for elderly parents/relatives, which most face at some point in their lives. Especially with the baby boomer generation aging, this is a topic no longer limited to people with children. Hopefully that could steer the conversation past the inevitable Well, you didn't have to have kids, and you just don't want to work as hard as I do argument. We all had parents at some point and can't made to feel guilty about that, right? Right? -Christa _ Christa Zweig Post Doctoral Associate Box 110485, Bldg 810 Florida Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611.0485 352-870-4132 (phone) 352-846-0841 (fax) http://www.wec.ufl.edu/postdoc/zweig/ From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] on behalf of Michael Clary [michael.cl...@ch2m.com] Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 22:47 To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:50 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards Dossey, indeed you do have a life. But with no spouse and no kids, you have no basis for understanding what those who do have kids face in managing to work while managing their families. It is a great loss to science for them to drop out of work, or to have to miss work in order to care for children. This isn't money to hire a baby sitter. It is to allow the working parent a little time off in the early stages of parenthood, while keeping the NSF project he or she has committed to going by hiring a temporary replacement. Not having children, you would not face that concern, and thus would not have that expense. This is sort of like a lot of things going on in society right now. You oppose something that has no effect on you. In Europe, new parents get extended leave. I do not know how that is worked out for ongoing projects. Here, I do know that new parents working at enlightened institutions that provide family leave have found that even with taking the leave, they still had to work in order to keep a project going. They just didn't get paid, and they still had the problems of providing for their family to be cared for. Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_2 5WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp? WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Dear Unmarried Single, You would naturally feel discriminated against because you have no idea, and absolutely cannot know, the amount of time it takes to care for a family. Before we had a child, my husband and I worked 12 hours a day or more. Yes, it was hard to get laundry, cooking, cleaning, etc. done, but we had the luxury or working 12 hours a day. Once we had a child, we no longer have that option. Taking care of a child is a full-time job, and having a regular academic job on top of it is like working two jobs. Having children is a right that must be recognized by institutions and made allowances for, which is not there in academia. You can have no idea how difficult it is to be an academician and a parent. (And all this goes even for people who have to care for other family members like elderly or ill parents). We should not have to make a choice between taking care of our families and continuing an academic career. I am so happy to see that NSF has recognized this and is moving int eh right direction. And BTW, spousal hires by Universities is not nepotism. It is simply keeping their desired people happy so that they stay in the University. Again, it is recognizing that family is important and that people should not have to choose between family and career. I am sure the spouse is qualified for the job they are hired for. -Kay
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I hope the article below is unnecessarily pessimistic, but there is a real problem and the resulting professional and personal carnage is something we can't afford to allow to continue--David Duffy http://www.slate.com/articles/double_x/doublex/2013/06/female_academics_pay_a_heavy_baby_penalty.single.html In the Ivory Tower, Men OnlyFor men, having children is a career advantage. For women, it’s a career killer. By Mary Ann Mason http://www.slate.com/authors.mary_ann_mason.html On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 4:59 AM, Kay Shenoy kay.yellowt...@gmail.com wrote: Dear Unmarried Single, You would naturally feel discriminated against because you have no idea, and absolutely cannot know, the amount of time it takes to care for a family. Before we had a child, my husband and I worked 12 hours a day or more. Yes, it was hard to get laundry, cooking, cleaning, etc. done, but we had the luxury or working 12 hours a day. Once we had a child, we no longer have that option. Taking care of a child is a full-time job, and having a regular academic job on top of it is like working two jobs. Having children is a right that must be recognized by institutions and made allowances for, which is not there in academia. You can have no idea how difficult it is to be an academician and a parent. (And all this goes even for people who have to care for other family members like elderly or ill parents). We should not have to make a choice between taking care of our families and continuing an academic career. I am so happy to see that NSF has recognized this and is moving int eh right direction. And BTW, spousal hires by Universities is not nepotism. It is simply keeping their desired people happy so that they stay in the University. Again, it is recognizing that family is important and that people should not have to choose between family and career. I am sure the spouse is qualified for the job they are hired for. -Kay -- Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit Botany University of Hawaii 3190 Maile Way Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA 1-808-956-8218
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Dossey, indeed you do have a life. But with no spouse and no kids, you have no basis for understanding what those who do have kids face in managing to work while managing their families. It is a great loss to science for them to drop out of work, or to have to miss work in order to care for children. This isn't money to hire a baby sitter. It is to allow the working parent a little time off in the early stages of parenthood, while keeping the NSF project he or she has committed to going by hiring a temporary replacement. Not having children, you would not face that concern, and thus would not have that expense. This is sort of like a lot of things going on in society right now. You oppose something that has no effect on you. In Europe, new parents get extended leave. I do not know how that is worked out for ongoing projects. Here, I do know that new parents working at enlightened institutions that provide family leave have found that even with taking the leave, they still had to work in order to keep a project going. They just didn't get paid, and they still had the problems of providing for their family to be cared for. Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well as expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be described and implemented separately. PURPOSE The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral researchers. Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 in salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated indirect costs may be in addition to the salary payment and therefore, the total supplemental funding request may exceed $12,000. Special instructions for use by PIs and Sponsored Projects Offices in preparation and submission of postdoctoral investigators-Life Balance Supplemental Funding Requests are included as an attachment (see below) to this DCL. Additional questions should be directed to the cognizant NSF program director identified in the award notice. Sincerely, Wanda E. Ward Office Head Office of International Integrative Activities ATD of ATB and ISI -- Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
I have to admit I was a bit taken aback by the statement of Aaron. If he had said that about minorities and affirmative action, it would be CLEARLY inappropriate. But women are still discriminated against, not just deliberately by institutionally, and the plain facts are that despite women and men showing up equally in grad school in science, women tend to not stay in scientific fields (I think that recent blog post about the Life History of an Ecology PhD was illuminating and mentioned something about this as well), so it is wonderful that the NSF is making strides to help women and families out. I myself would have continued a traditional trajectory in science rather than accidentally going into science writing had I not had a child, and then wanted to stay home and raise that child. I created my own career so I could keep a hand in wildlife/conservation but still stay at home. Then when I went back to get my PhD at Rice in 2003, I ended up having to drop out because of a divorce. Had I had some sort of financial support from NSF (well I had a GRFP, but not help with the kids/childcare), I probably could have stayed. Now that the kids are almost off to college, I can return to a PhD program, and get back to that original career path of conservation and policy work but I may be looked at like an old-lady now among a bunch of 20 and 30 year old students - LOL. Fortunately I am pretty bohemian and youthful :) But I digress. Wendee Wendee Nicole, M.S. Wildlife Ecology ~ Freelance Writer * Photographer * Bohemian Web: [ http://www.wendeenicole.com ] Blog: [ http://bohemianadventures.blogspot.com ] Twitter: twitter.com/bohemianone Email: wendeenic...@nasw.org Online Magazine Writing Class starts July 20, 2013 - Ask me! On 7/4/13 6:49 AM, David L. McNeely mcnee...@cox.net wrote: Dossey, indeed you do have a life. But with no spouse and no kids, you have no basis for understanding what those who do have kids face in managing to work while managing their families. It is a great loss to science for them to drop out of work, or to have to miss work in order to care for children. This isn't money to hire a baby sitter. It is to allow the working parent a little time off in the early stages of parenthood, while keeping the NSF project he or she has committed to going by hiring a temporary replacement. Not having children, you would not face that concern, and thus would not have that expense. This is sort of like a lot of things going on in society right now. You oppose something that has no effect on you. In Europe, new parents get extended leave. I do not know how that is worked out for ongoing projects. Here, I do know that new parents working at enlightened institutions that provide family leave have found that even with taking the leave, they still had to work in order to keep a project going. They just didn't get paid, and they still had the problems of providing for their family to be cared for. Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT. mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=U SNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
So an attempt to correct the institutionalized discrimination against women in professional positions having children is discrimination against child-free people? Then I suppose you can extend the argument that being single with no children is a decision you've made with full knowledge of its potential negative effects on your career. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 9:59 PM, Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click htt**p://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/**nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_** id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well as expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be described and implemented separately. PURPOSE The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral researchers. Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 in salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated indirect costs may be in addition to the salary payment and therefore, the total supplemental funding request may exceed $12,000. Special instructions for use by PIs and Sponsored Projects Offices in preparation and submission of postdoctoral investigators-Life Balance Supplemental Funding Requests are included as an attachment (see below) to this DCL. Additional questions should be directed to the cognizant NSF program director identified in the award notice. Sincerely, Wanda E. Ward Office Head Office of International Integrative Activities ATD of ATB and ISI -- Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation http://allthingsbugs.com/**about/people/http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/ http://www.facebook.com/**Allthingsbugshttp://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs https://www.facebook.com/**InvertebrateStudiesInstitutehttps://www.facebook.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute 1-352-281-3643
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
We are all much too busy managing our work and families, parents no longer own that distinction. To the degree that parenthood has been an informed choice for the average postdoc for some time, my modest proposal would be to make this opportunity available to any early career scientist who has made a personal decision that was reasonably certain to compete with their professional career. Michael -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely Sent: Thursday, July 04, 2013 4:50 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards Dossey, indeed you do have a life. But with no spouse and no kids, you have no basis for understanding what those who do have kids face in managing to work while managing their families. It is a great loss to science for them to drop out of work, or to have to miss work in order to care for children. This isn't money to hire a baby sitter. It is to allow the working parent a little time off in the early stages of parenthood, while keeping the NSF project he or she has committed to going by hiring a temporary replacement. Not having children, you would not face that concern, and thus would not have that expense. This is sort of like a lot of things going on in society right now. You oppose something that has no effect on you. In Europe, new parents get extended leave. I do not know how that is worked out for ongoing projects. Here, I do know that new parents working at enlightened institutions that provide family leave have found that even with taking the leave, they still had to work in order to keep a project going. They just didn't get paid, and they still had the problems of providing for their family to be cared for. Aaron T. Dossey bugoc...@gmail.com wrote: Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_2 5WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp? WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well as expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be described and implemented separately. PURPOSE The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral researchers. Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 in salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated
[ECOLOG-L] Anti-singles discrimination? Re: [ECOLOG-L] Career - Life Balance supplements to NSF awards
Sounds like institutionalized discrimination against unmarried people without kids to me. But with nepotism (spousal hires, etc.) running rampant in the ivory tower, I don't expect better in academia. I wonder if I can get some funding to hire a maid or help with various things as such. I am not married and have no kids, but society forgets that people like me still have a LIFE. Some help with laundry and cleaning, maybe some errands now and then, would help me a lot to balance my LIFE and WORK. I don't like the direction this NSF thing is going at all. On 7/3/2013 11:01 PM, David Inouye wrote: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=clickhttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13109/nsf13109.jsp?WT.mc_id=USNSF_25WT.mc_ev=click Date: July 2, 2013 BACKGROUND Instituted in 2012, NSF's Career-Life Balance (CLB) Initiative is an ambitious, ten-year initiative that will build on the best of family-friendly practices among individual NSF programs to expand them to activities NSF-wide. This agency-level approach will help attract, retain, and advance graduate students, postdoctoral students, and early-career researchers in STEM fields. This effort is designed to help reduce the rate at which women depart from the STEM workforce. Further information on the CLB initiative may be found on the Foundation's website. The primary emphasis of NSF's CLB initiative in FY 2012 was focused on opportunities such as dependent-care issues (child birth/adoption and elder care). These issues initially were addressed through NSF's Faculty Early Career Development (CAREER) program, where career-life balance opportunities can help retain a significant fraction of early career STEM talent. In FY 2013, the Foundation intends to further integrate CLB opportunities through other programs such as the Graduate Research Fellowship Program (GRFP) and postdoctoral fellowship programs, as well as expand opportunities such as dual career-hiring through the Increasing the Participation and Advancement of Women in Academic Science and Engineering Careers (ADVANCE) program. Each of these opportunities will be described and implemented separately. PURPOSE The purpose of this DCL is to announce a gender neutral supplemental funding opportunity for NSF research awardees that support postdoctoral investigators. NSF recognizes that dependent care responsibilities and other family considerations pose unique challenges for postdoctoral researchers. Principal Investigators (PIs) of research awards are invited to submit supplemental funding requests to support additional personnel (e.g., research technicians or equivalent) to sustain research while the postdoctoral researcher is on family leave. These requests may include funding for up to 3 months of salary support, for a maximum of $12,000 in salary compensation. The fringe benefits and associated indirect costs may be in addition to the salary payment and therefore, the total supplemental funding request may exceed $12,000. Special instructions for use by PIs and Sponsored Projects Offices in preparation and submission of postdoctoral investigators-Life Balance Supplemental Funding Requests are included as an attachment (see below) to this DCL. Additional questions should be directed to the cognizant NSF program director identified in the award notice. Sincerely, Wanda E. Ward Office Head Office of International Integrative Activities ATD of ATB and ISI -- Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Founder/Owner: All Things Bugs Capitalizing on Low-Crawling Fruit from Insect-Based Innovation http://allthingsbugs.com/about/people/ http://www.facebook.com/Allthingsbugs https://www.facebook.com/InvertebrateStudiesInstitute 1-352-281-3643
