Part of the ecosystem we need to contend with is that the federal grants from which many research assistants and postdocs in science are paid set the pay for RAs and postdocs too low. Faculty may feel tempted to shrug and pass on the bad pay without pushing back. That’s fucked.

If your grant doesn’t allow you to pay certain salaries, be up front during the hiring process about that. I talk openly to my students about why the numbers are what they are, depending on my funding source.
It is also the case that when I apply for grant money, I try to ask for a higher than typical salary and I do try to justify my request in my budget justification. I still haven’t won a grant with a postdoc in it so I don’t know how that’s going.
In the long run, I’ve reminded my students and postdoc that I think unions are great!

A union contract that binds the university to pay them a certain among actually makes it so that my request to federal agencies is “this is what I am required to pay.” Academic unions ftw!
I also think that all faculty should, to the extent of their ability given their circumstances, participate in advocating for an increase in minimum wages and an increase in federal and state funding for science and universities to cover the increased cost.
It is unethical to insist that labor stay cheaper because it benefits your research career. These are human beings we are talking about, not pieces of equipment.

I also acknowledge there is a structure out there coercing us to do that and we need to change that structure.
Academic funding is organized around the idea that junior researchers should be paid below a living wage.

It is up to faculty to resist the coercion, but that is not enough. It is up to all members of our society to recognize and dismantle the structure in the first place.
Pretending that this is all up to individual faculty or even individual departments individualizes a structural problem and lets the structure off the hook.

And faculty unions where we exist have a part to play here, including in supporting contingent lecturers and their unions
But I also want ppl, when they see the $$ for science grants, to be okay with this especially if it is paying people’s salary. A grad student and postdoc at current wages can each cost $70k/year. Funding will need to grow for wages to grow w/o shrinking hiring.
A note to folks about unionizing junior researchers: scientists letting humanists do all the work is trash. Just because science students tend to be paid more doesn’t mean that you don’t benefit from union organizing. Show some solidarity. Help out.
Insert the part where I go on a long rant about how we are all dealing with huge multi billion dollar institutions and students would benefit a lot from learning in detail where the leavers of power are and how they work on faculty and this is necessary to organize effectively
As a student, I assumed individual faculty had more power than they did. As a postdoc, I saw how these juggernaut institutions knew exactly how to keep faculty in place. It’s an economic and psychological art. And the solutions to the problems produced require solidarity.
Case in point: until the Obama administration, the NIH literally barred postdocs across the life sciences from making more than like ~ $40K/year. Federal policy!
tl;dr
It’s easy to hate on the professor who says she can’t pay more off her grants (and whose research helps mass incarceration so you shouldn’t work for her anyway) but you need to confront the system that is at work producing her stance on how wages affect academic hiring

More from Society

We finally have the U.S. Citizenship Act Bill Text! I'm going to go through some portions of the bill right now and highlight some of the major changes and improvements that it would make to our immigration system.

Thread:


First the Bill makes a series of promises changes to the way we talk about immigrants and immigration law.

Gone would be the term "alien" and in its place is "noncitizen."

Also gone would be the term "alienage," replaced with "noncitizenship."


Now we get to the "earned path to citizenship" for all undocumented immigrants present in the United States on January 1, 2021.

Under this bill, anyone who satisfies the eligibility criteria for a new "lawful prospective immigrant status" can come out of the shadows.


So, what are the eligibility criteria for becoming a "lawful prospective immigrant status"? Those are in a new INA 245G and include:

- Payment of the appropriate fees
- Continuous presence after January 1, 2021
- Not having certain criminal record (but there's a waiver)


After a person has been in "lawful prospective immigrant status" for at least 5 years, they can apply for a green card, so long as they still pass background checks and have paid back any taxes they are required to do so by law.

However! Some groups don't have to wait 5 years.

You May Also Like

A THREAD ON @SarangSood

Decoded his way of analysis/logics for everyone to easily understand.

Have covered:
1. Analysis of volatility, how to foresee/signs.
2. Workbook
3. When to sell options
4. Diff category of days
5. How movement of option prices tell us what will happen

1. Keeps following volatility super closely.

Makes 7-8 different strategies to give him a sense of what's going on.

Whichever gives highest profit he trades in.


2. Theta falls when market moves.
Falls where market is headed towards not on our original position.


3. If you're an options seller then sell only when volatility is dropping, there is a high probability of you making the right trade and getting profit as a result

He believes in a market operator, if market mover sells volatility Sarang Sir joins him.


4. Theta decay vs Fall in vega

Sell when Vega is falling rather than for theta decay. You won't be trapped and higher probability of making profit.