2001-05-19, UC Davis, Minutes

May 19 2001 Minutes PDF Print
First Meeting of Postdoctoral Representatives from the University of California Campuses

Minutes of the May 19, 2001 meeting sponsored by the UC Davis Postdoctoral Scholars Association (PSA).
Meeting location and time: Mee Room at the Memorial Union, UC Davis, 10:30 AM to 3:45 PM.
Meeting called to order at 10:30 AM by Tom Peavy, (UC Davis PSA Chair).

(1) Welcome and opening comments by Tom Peavy.

Recently, postdoctoral scholar issues have surfaced both at the national and UC levels, resulting in a series of recommendations. Now it is up to postdocs to ensure the implementation of such recommendations. Postdoctoral organizations can act locally with Graduate Councils and Graduate Divisions (Graduate Deans), but UC systemwide issues (such as title codes) need to be addressed by systemwide committees with representation from all UC campuses. The objectives of this meeting are: (1) to facilitate a coordinated effort by UC postdoctoral scholars for systemwide committee representation at the Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA) and the Council of Graduate Deans (CoGD); and (2) to create a systemwide network of communication among UC postdoctoral scholars.

Short introduction of participants:

UC Berkeley Mary O'Riordan and Dagmar Truckses
UC Davis Teresa Dillinger, Christine Hotz, Tom Peavy, and Paulo Verardi
UC Los Angeles Lisa Rogers
UC Riverside Dan Stasko
UC San Francisco Luanna Putney
UC Santa Barbara Jan Sumerel
UC Santa Cruz Renee Baran
Stanford University Megan Houseweart

(2) Commentary/presentations of Campus Postdoctoral Representatives on postdoctoral concerns and issues.

UC Davis Tom Peavy (PSA Chair): The UC Davis PSA organization was organized first by starting an e-mail listserv for postdocs and social gatherings at pubs on Friday evenings. Topics such as housing and grievances were informally discussed and a formal organization was finally established in the Fall of 1999. The organization instituted bylaws and surveyed the UC Davis postdoc population in the Spring of 2000 with 194 responses (a complete report on the survey can be found at http://stuaff.ucdavis.edu/postdocs/surveyresults.html). The survey revealed that UC Davis postdocs are generally satisfied with their research experience but are confused and concerned about benefits and employment titles. Postdocs at UC Davis are typically hired under the titles of non-student postgraduate researcher (PGR, 53%), visiting postdoctoral scholar (41%), and unclassified (postdoctoral fellow funded externally, about 2%). Visiting postdoctoral scholars have to negotiate their salaries and have very limited benefits. PGR postdocs have full benefits and an established salary scale, but usually have appointments at less than 100% time to adjust their salary to a negotiated amount. Unclassified postdocs have no benefits. Most UC Davis postdocs feel they are not well integrated into the university community and are pessimistic about employment possibilities. In general, postdocs would like to have the opportunity to teach and would like the PSA to expand its roles in advocacy, representation, and service provision. International postdocs face additional issues, especially with visas.

In the Fall of 2000, the PSA was invited to designate a representative to the UC Davis Graduate Council. The PSA developed a list of recommendations (http://postdocs.ucdavis.edu/Recommend.html) and presented it for discussion at the Graduate Council. Issues include title codes, full-time appointments, minimum salaries, benefits, offer letters, career services, postdoc performance evaluations, and mentorship evaluations. One of our primary interests is the establishment of a campuswide minimum salary payscale. The consensus recommendation of the UC Davis PSA is to have an entry salary that is at least the current minimum salary of the NIH/NRSA scale (currently $28, 260 for fiscal year 2001, see http://www.nih.gov/niams/grants/notice/notod01-011.html). This is consistent with the recommendation from the CoGD Report on Postdoctoral Education at UC (http://www-ogsr.ucsd.edu/pdrep.htm). Regarding the NRSA payscale, NIH recently announced that "the NIH supports higher stipends for NRSA recipients and therefore announces tentative targets of $25,000 for graduate and $45,000 for entry-level postdoctoral stipends. Future budget requests will incorporate 10 to 12 percent stipend increases until these targets are reached. After attainment of these targets, the real value of stipends will be maintained with annual cost-of-living adjustments." (for more info see the full report at http://grants.nih.gov/training/nas_report/NIHResponse.htm). After inquiring with NIH, we were informed by Walter Schaffer (NIH Research Training Officer) that $45,000 was chosen as the appropriate stipend level because it is close to the entry-level federal salary paid to GS-11 employees (the level at which most Ph.D.s are hired). We agree that this is an equitable salary level, but we are also concerned that a rapid increase may negatively affect faculty support for establishing the NRSA payscale as the minimum postdoc salary.

UC Los Angeles Lisa Rogers (Postdoctoral Scholar Representative): UCLA does not have a PSA, but does have a dedicated administrative assistant at Graduate Studies whose job is to support postdocs and administer an e-mail listserv. According to Lisa's experience, most postdocs are under the title of visiting scholars. Issues at UCLA include postdoc mentorship, salaries (especially the high cost of living), and health benefits (which are not automatic). There are some contract issues as well (e.g., with NIH). UC Los Angeles does have an excellent career center.

UC Berkeley Mary O'Riordan (President, Berkeley Postdoctoral Association): Since postdocs have no time or continuity to follow their interests, the Berkeley Postdoctoral Association has recently proposed the creation of an Office of Postdoctoral Affairs, headed by an Associate Dean and funded by a postdoc fee to be paid by faculty advisors or departments (about $150.00 per postdoc and per year). The proposal has been well received at UC Berkeley, but funding is the main issue. Currently there is one full-time administrator (Postdoctoral Coordinator) and a 50% administrative assistant at the Graduate Division that are dedicated to postdoc issues. In addition, UC Berkeley has been trying to develop a new web site to maintain the flow of information, as the old one is obsolete. Continuity is always an issue for postdocs and postdoctoral associations. Implementation of policies is also an issue. UC Berkeley has already established a policy of requiring offer letters for postdoctoral appointments, but the administration and faculty lag behind and typically present the offer letter after the initiation of the appointment.

UC Berkeley Dagmar Truckses (Berkeley Postdoctoral Association Representative): Regarding the health care issue, the Berkeley Postdoctoral Association has secured a group health insurance plan for postdocs (except those paid directly by funding agencies), paid by postdocs. However, a systemwide postdoc health insurance plan may be a better and cheaper way to approach the issue. In addition, UC Berkeley is trying to develop an emergency loan program for new postdocs (especially first-year and international postdocs) to help with rent deposits, etc. So far, only some departments have such funds (donations from faculty), and the association is trying to make it a campuswide fund with donations from faculty, companies, etc. Childcare is also a major issue, as postdocs are at the bottom of the priority list.

UC Santa Cruz Renee Baran (Postdoctoral Scholar Representative): Renee and a group of postdocs, mostly from Biological Sciences, are trying to assemble a Postdoctoral Association. The group conducted a small survey last year, and statistics similar to UC Davis were observed. However, approximately 50% of the postdocs are on fellowships (unclassified), and the lack of health care is therefore the number one issue (they are also not eligible to contribute to social security). Other issues include official professional status, housing, postdoc training programs and continuity of the effort to form a Postdoctoral Association.

UC Riverside Dan Stasko (Postdoctoral Scholar Representative): UC Riverside is rapidly growing, but there is no postdoc network and no interaction amongst postdocs on campus. There is no postdoc association or e-mail listserv. In general the issues are similar to other campuses. For example, postdocs usually complain of the lack of grievance procedures, visa issues for international postdocs, etc.

UC Santa Barbara Jan Sumerel (Postdoctoral Scholar Representative): Most postdocs at UC Santa Barbara are recruited, and therefore can negotiate and are usually offered full benefits. However, if they bring external funding, they have limited benefit coverage. Some postdocs from countries with Ph.D.s that are not equivalent to Ph.D. degrees from the U.S. can be paid significantly less than domestic counterparts. There are no professional development and career services. People on NIH grants have to sign a payback clause. The high cost of living, including housing, is one of the main issues. There is no maternity leave and affordable childcare. Intellectual property, patent, and visa problems for international postdocs are also relevant issues. The materials department has a networking weekend (conference) with companies that provide a lot of opportunities for postdocs.

UC San Francisco Luanna Putney (PSA Treasurer): According to a Fall 2000 survey, UC San Francisco has about 800 postdoctoral scholars. This number does not include some titles, such as the clinical series, and is therefore an underestimation. Of these 800, about 62% are male, 38% female, and 56% foreign. Due to the large population of foreign postdocs the PSA has created a subcommittee on foreign issues. One important issue for foreign postdocs is adequate support and staffing at the visa office. The PSA has representatives that sit on various campus committees, such as the Chancellor's Council, Graduate Council, Chancellor's Committee on the Status of Women, and the Chancellor's Committee on Diversity. The newly appointed Assistant Dean of Graduate Outreach and Postdoctoral Affairs is responsible for managing postdoc issues. She is expected to work 50% on graduate outreach and 50% on postdoctoral affairs. Her goals include administering postdoc appointment letters, tracking titles and keeping records on all postdocs and setting up an administrative postdoc web site (with demographics, housing information, etc.). Members of the PSA have been in a subcommittee of the Graduate Council, and a set of recommendations to improve postdoctoral training has recently been endorsed. Inclusive in these recommendations is the requirement for a minimum NIH-based salary for postdocs, as well as a 15% increase above the national payscale due to the high cost of living in the Bay Area. Next week the PSA will conduct a signature drive and ask postdocs, faculty, and staff to read and endorse the recommendation. The PSA will then officially present the endorsed recommendation to the Academic Senate. The PSA has also established a seminar series (Practice of Science Series), where funding has been secured for the next three years from the science departments ($20,000/per year).

Stanford University Megan Houseweart (PSA Officer): The Stanford University Postdoc Association (SUPD) was formed in 1998. Activities include monthly meetings, working with the administration, holding a speaker's series, and social activities (happy hours, etc.). A Postdoc Office was created headed by an Associate Dean, as suggested by the SUPD. The office serves as a liaison between postdocs and administrators and has a small budget that covers speakers, etc. The Postdoc Office administers a web page for postdocs. The SUPD also has its own web site. Some of the important issues at Stanford University are: (1) salaries, especially considering Bay Area living costs; (2) extended benefits (dental and vision); (3) postdoc status (postdocs have a "non-matriculated graduate student" status and pay tuition); (4) housing; (5) lack of representation in university committees; and (6) reform the conflict resolution process. The SUPD has succeeded in obtaining representation on the Provost Committee, in creating the Postdoctoral Affairs Office to standardize treatment of postdocs, and lowering the tuition from $1,000 to $125/quarter. The latest annual survey of the postdoc population (175 responses) shows that postdocs are 32 years-old on average, 54% are married, 12 % have children, salaries are $34,000 on average (up from $32,000 last year), and the average cost for rent is $1,500/month.

Lunch break: 12:15 PM 12:59 PM

(3) Summary of issues common and unique to UC campuses, and recommended improvements:

(i) Professional designation:

Postdocs need to be distinguished from faculty, staff and students, with a clearly defined professional designation.
Implementation of a systemwide, specifically designated title code (e.g., Postdoctoral Scholars Series).
Equal and consistent treatment for all postdocs, independent of funding sources.
(ii) Establishment of a minimum postdoctoral salary scale.

(iii) Full benefits should be provided to all postdocs, including:

Full health benefits (non-university employed postdocs are currently not allowed to buy into the group insurance plans offered by the university).
Vision and dental.
Retirement.
Leave (maternity, sick and vacation).
(iv) Provision of adequate staffing to administer postdoctoral affairs with a designated liaison. This should include specifically designated, permanently funded administrative staff and office.

(v) Additional support for international postdocs:

Expanded support with visas, green cards, etc.
Training of international offices (e.g., UC Davis SISS) in issues relevant to postdocs.
Career development assistance (e.g., workshops on language development, professional English writing skills, etc.).
(vi) Information transfer amongst university offices on postdoc issues and policies to ensure implementation.

Education of faculty (at the department level).
Education of administration (at the department level).
Set up an e-mail system to broadcast postdoc policies and guidelines to departments in order to assure that such policies reach administrators (department chairs, staff) and faculty.
(vii) Establishment of mentorship guidelines, which might include:

Training for mentors (faculty workshops or classes).
Yearly written evaluations.
Allocation of suitable space (e.g., desk, bench space) and resources for postdoctoral training.
Must include implementation policies to assure education of faculty.
(viii) Establishment of appropriate and consistent grievance and mediation procedures.
Informal and formal procedures for postdocs
Specific for the postdoc-mentor relationship.
Free legal services.
20 (ix) Access to general university services with suitable priority and rates.
Childcare.
Housing.
20 20 (x) Professional development for postdocs.
Including guidance/education of graduate students, the future postdocs.
(xi) Recognition of PSAs from the Office of the President (UCOP).
Request funding to participate at the CoGD and the CCGA meetings.
(4) Discussion about CCGA and CoGD with the UC Davis Graduate Council Vice Chair and CCGA representative John Labavitch, and the UC Davis Associate Dean of Graduate Studies Jerry Hedrick.

Summary of information reported by Prof. John Labavitch and Associate Dean Hedrick:

The entire administration and Academic Senate of each campus are mirrored at the systemwide level. In terms of administration, the CoGD is a systemwide meeting of Graduate Deans that makes recommendations on issues concerning graduate education. It is up to the individual Graduate Deans to accept and implement those recommendations. However, the Office of the President (UCOP) is the highest administrative authority. UCOP can establish policies and issue statements that can be binding to all campuses. The CoGD has graduate student representatives. Deans can undertake issues on their own, and so can the CoGD. For instance, in 1998, the CoGD issued a report on postdoctoral education at UC and a series of recommendations on postdoc issues, including assigning responsibility for postdoctoral education to Graduate Councils and Graduate Divisions (http://www-ogsr.ucsd.edu/pdre p.htm). Currently, UC Santa Barbara seems to be the only UC campus where the Graduate Division is not accepting responsibility for postdocs.

The CCGA can be considered a systemwide "Graduate Council" of the Academic Senate. The CCGA evaluates graduate programs and is responsible for graduate student welfare. There is no higher authority for graduate education than the CCGA. The CCGA responds from issues that originate at the local councils at each campus and only rarely takes issues on its own. The CCGA has graduate student representatives as well. The chair of the CCGA (Cliff Brunk from UCLA) has demonstrated interest in having a postdoctoral scholar representative in the committee. Recently, the UC Davis Graduate Council instituted mentorship guidelines for all Graduate Groups and programs on campus. A similar set of guidelines should also be prepared for postdocs.

In terms of who is responsible for what, the UC has a shared government system, in which both the faculty and the administration govern the University. For example, the Graduate Council (Academic Senate) decides eligibility for graduate student title codes. Administration gets involved with salaries, etc. Administration and faculty constantly seek each other for advice. Consequently, administration and faculty could handle postdoc issues equally.

The CoGD meets once a quarter (except summer), three times a year, each time at a different campus. Each meeting is 1.5-days long (4.5 days/year). The first part of the meeting (half-day) is for Assistant and Associate Deans. Then, there is an evening social reception and dinner, and the Deans meet by themselves that evening. On the second day, there is a meeting where all members participate and can freely discuss issues with all members of the council. There is a subcommittee (Deans and staff from all campuses) that deals with postdoctoral issues. The current chair of the CoGD is the Dean of Graduate Studies from UC Santa Barbara (Charles Li). The next academic year's chair will be the Dean of Graduate Studies from UC Davis (Cristina GonzE1lez). The postdoctoral organizations should be able to contact the chair of CoGD to know when issues concerning postdoctoral scholars will be discussed at their meetings.

The CCGA has monthly, daylong meetings. About half of the meetings are held at UC Berkeley, and the others are held at other campuses. UC graduate students have a Southern and a Northern California representatives. At each meeting, there is an opportunity for each representative (including student representatives) to discuss and bring issues from their campuses or regions. Since postdoc representatives may not be able to go to all the meetings, UC Davis CCGA representative John Labavitch will ask the CCGA about the possibility of having postdoctoral representation as needed (when postdoctoral issues are discussed). He will also inquire whether the postdoc representative (or representatives) has to be the same person throughout the year or whether the representative can be rotated. However, it was also recognized that while the time commitment for representatives to these committees can be extensive, the familiarity, sociology and continuity established by a single, long-term representative would contribute to the efficiency of the process.

John Labavitch and Jerry Hedrick recommend the postdoc representatives to do something, but do it in the simplest possible way:

For the CoGD, take the systemwide postdoc list of recommendations to the postdoc subcommittee members and ask them which recommendations have been or are in consideration by their subcommittee. Then write to the chair of CoGD and present our list with an analysis of what is being worked on and by whom, and ask for advice on how to proceed.

For the CCGA, contact the chair of CCGA and bring to his attention the systemwide postdoctoral scholar issues to be considered by the CCGA. Prioritize and present sub-sets of issues at the meetings. The next meetings will be in June (UC Irvine) and July (UC Berkeley). The CCGA will not meet in August. John Labavitch will address the CCGA regarding the systemwide postdoc meeting at its next meeting in June.

(5) Discuss Plan of Action.

(i) The postdoc representatives from the UC campuses unanimously decided to form the Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) of the University of California. The general guidelines of the CPS are:

The mission of the CPS is to oversee postdoctoral scholar issues UC systemwide.
To ensure equal representation, each UC campus can delegate one member to the CPS.
At this point, members include one representative from each campus:
UC Berkeley Mary O'Riordan
UC Davis Tom Peavy
UC Los Angeles Lisa Rogers
UC Riverside Dan Stasko
UC San Francisco Luanna Putney
UC Santa Barbara Jan Sumerel
UC Santa Cruz Renee Baran

The CPS will try to ensure representation from UC Irvine and UC San Diego.
The appropriateness of including representation from the National Laboratories managed by UC (i.e., Berkeley, Livermore, and Los Alamos) will be further investigated.
The Stanford University Postdoc Association (Megan Houseweart) will have a consulting membership status with the CPS, without voting privileges.
Any member can bring specific issues for discussion and vote.
Majority wins (1 vote per campus).
The chair of the CPS will decide meeting agendas, preside over meetings, and be the official CPS representative. The members of the CPS will choose the chair.
Tom Peavy (UC Davis) was chosen as the interim chair of the CPS.
(ii) Tom Peavy, chair of the CPS, will draft a letter to the Office of the President (UCOP), to be circulated by e-mail to the several campus representatives for approval, informing the UC President that:

The CPS was formed by postdoc representatives from UC campuses.
The CPS would like to be recognized by the UCOP as a formal organization within the UC system.
The CPS would like to have representation at systemwide committees such as the CCGA and the CoGD.
The CPS needs funding to attend meetings and run the organization.
(iii) Regarding CCGA and CoGD committee representation:

The CPS will draft a general statement to the chairs of the CCGA and the CoGD asking for further information and clarifications.
The CPS will then determine the appropriateness of having a representative or representatives (e.g., a southern and a northern representative) to these committees.
(iv) Duties will be spread out amongst the members from each campus. Each member will be primarily responsible for only a few issues, but will be expected to provide information specific to their campuses to other members. Responsibility for the systemwide issues raised in item (3) was delegated as follows:

Renee Baran, UC Santa Cruz: Distinct professional designation for postdocs.
Tom Peavy, UC Davis: Establishment of a minimum postdoctoral salary scale.
Renee Baran, UC Santa Cruz: Provision of full benefits.
Mary O'Riordan (UC Berkeley): Provide adequate staffing for postdoctoral affairs with a designated liaison, permanently funded administrative staff, and office.
Dan Stasko, UC Riverside: Additional support for international postdocs.
Jan Sumerel, UC Santa Barbara: Information transfer amongst university offices on postdoc issues and policies to ensure implementation.
Lisa Rogers, UC Los Angeles: Establishment of mentorship guidelines.
Luanna Putney, UC San Francisco: Establishment of appropriate and consistent grievance and mediation procedures.
Luanna Putney, UC San Francisco: Access to general university services with suitable priority and rates.
Teresa Dillinger, UC Davis: Professional development for postdocs.
Tom Peavy, UC Davis: Recognition (of PSAs and the CPS) from the Office of the President (UCOP).
(v) Delegates from each campus (especially the ones without PSAs) are encouraged to set up a postdoc listserv to discuss issues with other postdocs on campus.

(vi) The next UC Systemwide meeting of the CPS will be sponsored by the Berkeley Postdoctoral Association in September, 2001. The specific date, time and location will be announced by e-mail.

Meeting adjourned at 3:51 PM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

Prepared by Paulo Verardi, UC Davis PSA Secretary/Treasurer.

2001-09-22, UC Berkeley, Minutes

“University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) -- September 22, 2001 Meeting”

Minutes of the September 22, 2001 meeting (sponsored by the Berkeley Postdoctoral Association).

Meeting location and time: Room 102, Clark Kerr Campus, UC Berkeley, 9:30 AM to 3:00 PM.

Meeting called to order at 9:50 AM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

(1) Opening comments by Tom Peavy. The UC Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) was formed last May out of a need to talk to the administration regarding systemwide postdoctoral issues. The objectives of this meeting are: (1) to open a dialog with the UC Office of the President (UCOP) about UC postdoctoral affairs; (2) to explore the possibility of a UC systemwide health insurance plan; (3) to share information about the administrative procedures affecting postdoctoral researchers at each UC campus; and (4) to continue discussion amongst campus representatives about issues of concern to UC postdoctoral researchers. Postdoctoral organizations can act locally with Graduate Councils and Graduate Divisions (Graduate Deans), but UC systemwide issues (such as title codes) need to be addressed by systemwide committees such as the Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA) and the Council of Graduate Deans (CoGD) with representation from all UC campuses. Tom thanked the UC Berkeley campus for organizing and hosting the meeting.

Short introduction of campus representatives:
• UC Berkeley – Mary O’Riordan and Dagmar Truckses
• UC Davis – Tom Peavy and Paulo Verardi
• UC San Diego – Tara Chapman and Curtis Thompson
• UC San Francisco – Luanna Putney
• UC Santa Cruz – Renee Baran

Short introduction of invited participants:
• Ellen Switkes – UCOP, Assistant Vice President, Academic Advancement
• Steve Johnson – Garnett-Powers & Associates
• Tom Garnett – Garnett-Powers & Associates
• Gregory Brown – UC Berkeley, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Finance and Controller
• Claudia Covello – UC Berkeley, Director, Clinical Services / University Health Services
• Joyce Freedman – UC Berkeley, Director of Sponsored Projects
• Sam Castañeda – UC Berkeley, Visiting Scholar and Postdoc Affairs (VSPA) Coordinator
• Chris Karlovich – Stanford University, campus representative

(2) Ellen Switkes, UCOP, Assistant Vice President, Academic Advancement.

Postdocs are orphans among students, faculty and staff, without a specific official category or status. The postdoc issue was raised in 1998 when the CoGD put together a recommendation to clarify the status of postdocs and ensure their rights and privileges. The proposal was circulated around the system for preliminary review, but due to a complete lack of consensus it did not go forward. However, at the same time the postdoc issue was gaining momentum at the national scene and national recommendations clarifying the postdoc status paralleled the ones made by the CoGD. Now the administration anticipates putting together a new proposal by early fall. Input from postdocs and the CPS is welcome. There are a couple of issues that are not yet in place:

Status of postdocs is the most complicated issue. Currently, postdocs are categorized as employees, visiting employees, self-funded (own money, foreign governments, agencies), or funded from federal sources (e.g., NIH fellowships). NIH does not allow fellowship recipients to be categorized as employees but only as a trainee or fellow. A related issue concerns social security (SS) contributions. Employees are required to participate in SS (it requires a contribution from both the employer and the employee). NIH does not allow UC to put NIH fellows into employee status and pay SS. UC wants all postdocs to be categorized as employees, so that all kinds of benefits (health, dental, vision, employee cards, access to parking, recreation, childcare, etc.) will be automatic. Visiting postdocs, depending on how they are funded, are also in an unclear status (e.g., injuries on the job, etc.). Finally, another reason to have all postdocs as employees is the fact that the State of California distributes state funds according to a formula that takes into account the number of faculty members and postdocs at each campus, while other employees do not count. The lack of employee status also makes grievance procedures difficult to implement.

Funding agencies such as NIH finance their fellowship recipients through the UC payroll system (UC paychecks). The administration thinks that they can have the Benefits Office define fellowship postdocs as fellows, pay them as employees, and give them a 1099 at the end of the year (instead of a W-2), and in addition provide health insurance (UC is working with NIH to pay for health insurance costs).

UC can control and put policies in place on grievances, rules on % time appointments, and minimum salaries. Principal investigators (PIs) have reduced the % time of appointments to adjust salary rates. This is particularly bad for vacation and sick leave. In addition, retirement benefits are based on service credit (for long-term employees). UCOP would require 100% appointments except in cases where the postdoc is in fact working part-time.

Health insurance and supplemental pay are costly items that can be a burden to PIs with limited sources of funds. PIs may choose not have postdocs at all unless campuses supplement the differences. However, the university budget is bad this year and is projected to be even worse next year (up to 10% cut is expected).

Regarding minimum salaries, Tom Peavy mentioned that we may be diverging from the real issue, as faculty and administrators are focusing on actual figures and established salary scales (such as the NIH NRSA scale), and not on the issue itself. The bottom line is that the UC system does not have a minimum salary for its postdocs, with some postdocs earning below $20,000/year. Ellen mentioned that UCOP values the opinion of postdocs and the CPS regarding what would be a reasonable minimum salary rate. Ellen was asked what UCOP mandates regarding salaries, % appointments, etc., and Ellen mentioned that there is no UCOP mandate at this time.

Where things are now:

• The administration anticipates to put together a new proposal by early fall to be reviewed by the Graduate Deans.
• If everything goes well, a formal proposal will go out for review by campus committees (employees, faculty, Academic Senate committees, etc.) and systemwide committees (Systemwide Academic Senate, etc.), and then back to UCOP, when it may have to be resubmitted. The CPS and the postdoctoral scholar associations can help by getting involved in the discussions systemwide and at the individual campuses (faculty, vice-chancellors, etc.).
• The main issue is money to fund health insurance (particularly those that have their own money).

Another issue is retirement. Postdocs can be hired as visiting employees for up to 3 years (without being entered into the retirement system). One pro is that some benefits (e.g., vision and dental insurance) are only offered when you are in the retirement system. On the other side, employees in the retirement system are required to pay social security (it requires a contribution from both the employer and the employee). Visiting employees automatically participate in an alternative retirement plan, the Defined Contribution Plan (DCP), as “Safe Harbor” participants (it requires a contribution only from the employee). NIH fellows paid through payroll system could receive health insurance but could not be in the retirement system as NIH does not allow payments to SS.

Another item is limitation of service. The proposal on the table is for a 5-year limit on employment under postdoc status at UC, but another proposal is to limit it to 5 years total (based on employment at UC and elsewhere). After this period, employment would have to change to a regular academic (e.g., specialist series, professional research series) or staff (e.g., SRA) title.

The plan is to end up with a uniform grievance procedure, and dismissal and disciplinary procedures. Ellen also favors a mandate for written evaluations (e.g., annual), and an appointment letter stating salary, duration of employment, etc.

In terms of recruitment, hiring of postdocs does not require formal procedures (e.g., posting). Ellen would like to see a formalized procedure (similar to the hiring of faculty and staff) to assure that postdoctoral opportunities are advertised broadly.

Tom Peavy suggested that the administration should first agree on the principles to be included in the proposal (e.g., a minimum standard for salary), rather than getting caught up on exact numbers and details.

(3) Steve Johnson and Tom Garnett, Garnett-Powers & Associates (GPA). Insurance benefits proposal for University of California Postdoctoral Scholars.

Steve Johnson has worked at the University of California for 11 years in the Graduate Division in charge of postdocs (mostly at UC Irvine). He later joined GPA, a full service insurance brokerage firm. About 4 years ago Steve developed a health plan for non-employee postdoc fellows and scholars (e.g., NIH fellows) at UC Irvine (currently about 40 postdocs enrolled), and one year later for postdocs at UCLA (currently about 235 postdocs enrolled).

GPA could offer a systemwide plan, a southern or northern plan, or even plans for individual campuses. The plan presented today is through Health Net only, as the pool of carriers available for postdocs is limited, as most carriers require an employer/employee relationship. Postdocs represent a younger population and rates are lower since they are based on age. Health care costs for UC San Diego were not quoted, as GPA is not the broker of record for UCSD. Besides, health care costs in San Diego are slightly higher (1-2%) than other parts of Southern California, so if UCSD decides to participate, the rates may increase slightly. The rates for Northern California do not include UCSF. If UCSF participates, rates may change slightly.

For implementation, GPA plans to work at the departmental level. An enrollment form is given to postdocs and that form can be mailed or faxed to GPA. GPA sends the COBRA notification and sends the application to carriers, who will send identification cards to postdocs. Each month GPA will send an invoice to each department with a list of postdocs and premiums due for those postdocs with funds administered by the university. Postdocs with funding sources outside the university would receive an invoice directly. Payments would be sent to GPA and the GPA would pay the carriers. The advantage of working at the department level is that postdocs are notified immediately of the availability of health insurance. In addition, as the department terminates premium payments when a postdoc leaves, GPA will send out the COBRA paperwork immediately (carriers are not required to offer COBRA coverage as the employer/employee relationship does not exist, but GPA has negotiated with the carriers to provide COBRA coverage for up to 18 months). COBRA coverage is charged at the same rate (or only 2% more). GPA will work to accommodate campuses that want to administer the program through the central administration.

Tom Garnett discussed the details of the proposed plan that includes health, dental and vision. Health Net was chosen for health insurance but GPA will not be the broker of record for UCSD and UCSF. Two options will be given: the HMO plan and the point of service plan. The point of service plan is a three-tiered benefit plan that combines an HMO with a PPO plan. It provides the maximum flexibility as it relates to providers. This plan has HMO, PPO and Out of Service options.

Dental coverage includes an HMO and a PPO plan. The PPO plan is a two-tiered plan where there is a list of network dentists that charge a discounted fee. Under the vision plan (packaged with the Health Net plan), the frequency of benefits is 12/24/24 months for exams/lenses/frames, respectively.

Since Northern California health care costs are higher than Southern California costs, monthly rates for Northern California campuses (UCB, UCD, UCSC, and UCSF) will be slightly higher. A blended rate (a weighted average based on participation) for all campuses could also be provided (it would be up to postdocs). The monthly rates are illustrative, as they will depend on a few factors yet to be determined (e.g., inclusion of UCSD and UCSF, etc.), but include dental and vision coverage.

If postdocs as a group require repatriation and medical evacuation of foreign postdocs, it could be included in the plan (it would increase rates slightly). For an additional 1-2% increase, the Health Net plan could offer 24-hr coverage (on and off the job), that would not require postdocs to be under worker’s compensation. Disabilities and other compensations would not be included (unless if asked by postdocs).

Lunch break: 12:15 PM – 1:15 PM

(4) Postdoc discussion with campus representatives:

(i) Minutes from previous CPS meeting (05/19/2001) approved. Minutes will be posted in the UCD PSA web site (http://postdocs.ucdavis.edu/CPSMinMay19013.htm). Other campuses are welcome to post the minutes on their web sites as well.

(ii) In the last CPS meeting, campus representatives compiled a summary of issues and concerns common and unique to UC campuses. The CPS developed a questionnaire that was sent to campus representatives to research their campuses. The answers will be compiled and compared side by side. We can then go to CCGA and CoGD with the knowledge of what is going on at each campus. Each campus representative gave a brief report (the compiled list will be posted on the web):

• UC Davis (Tom Peavy): Dean of Graduate Studies (Cristina Gonzalez) is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. Associate Dean of Programs in Graduate Studies (Paul FitzGerald) is appointed 50% time (duties split between graduate students and postdocs). Faculty Assistant to the Dean for Postdoctoral Affairs (Jerry Hedrick) has a 10% appointment for postdocs. UCD has a postdoctoral Scholar Appointment Sheet used for postdoc appointments, but it is not frequently used. Records are maintained by graduate studies but are incomplete. Graduate studies maintains an e-mail listserv for all the Managing Service Officers (MSOs) and Operating Research Units (ORUs) on campus to disseminate information about postdoc affairs. The administration also uses the postdoc listserv maintained by the PSA to disseminate information to postdocs. As of Winter Quarter 2001, there are 463 postdocs at UCD, under basically 3 title codes: 3370 (Visiting Postdoctoral Scholar – temporary employees, limited benefits, 59.4%), 3240 (Non-Student Postgraduate Researcher – with full benefits, 38 %), and 9995 (Unclassified – Postdoctoral Fellows, no benefits, 2.6%). Salaries range from below 20K (5%) to over 42K (1.1%) with an average of 28K. Mentorship guidelines for postdocs currently do not exist, but are being considered by Graduate Council. Postdocs can resolve grievances informally through Mediation Services or the Associate Dean of Programs, or formally (written) using the Non-Senate Academic Appointees Grievance Procedures. Services for International Students and Scholars (SISS) assists postdocs with visas and maintaining legal status, but is understaffed at the moment. SISS disseminates information through their own listserv. Currently, there are virtually no housing services for postdocs on campus. There are 2 childcare centers but availability is variable (possibly waiting lists). There are two career centers that postdocs can use: the Internship and Career Center (together with students) and the Staff Development Center (with staff). Graduate Studies recently open their “Professors for the Future” program for postdocs as well.
• UC San Diego (Curtis Thompson and Tara Chapman): The information was compiled by Jennifer Oh (Coordinator of Postdoctoral Program, Office of Graduate studies and Research, OGSR). The Vice Chancellor of Research and Dean of Graduate Studies (Richard Attiyeh) is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. Part-time administrators include Marritt Bradford (forms processing and insurance enrollment, 75%) and Jennifer Oh (50%). UCSD has a Postdoctoral Scholar Appointment Form that each department completes and submits to OGSR. The administration does keep track of postdoc appointments and submits that info to UCOP. There are 1000-1200 postdocs at UCSD, under basically 3 title codes: 3370 (Visiting Postdoctoral Scholar – temporary employees, eligible just for medical), 3240(Non-Student Postgraduate Researcher – with full benefits but no UCRS, most frequently used), and 3296 (Research Fellow, for fellowship recipients, eligible for OGSR-administered Health Net, vision, and DentiCare). Postdocs that are paid directly are not on payroll (do not have a title code). Salaries range from 31K to 45K (PGRs). No minimum salary for fellows (maximum is 45K). Postdocs can resolve grievances formally and informally the same way as staff (through a facilitator from the Academic Affairs Office). The International Center advises foreign scholars on issues of visa, housing, and language preparation. Currently, there are very limited housing services for postdocs (there is a Student Off Campus Housing Office). The International Center offers childcare services but availability is limited (long waiting lists). Postdocs currently do not have access to the Career Center and career/professional development services.
• UC San Francisco (Luanna Putney): Dean of Graduate Division (Cliff Attkisson) is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. Assistant Dean of Postdoctoral Affairs (Christine Des Jarlais) is appointed 50% time on postdoc affairs. Appointment letters are issued to new postdocs by some departments, but all foreign postdocs do receive an information packet from the International Office. Graduate Division only keeps track of postdocs hired under the Visiting Postdoctoral Scholars title code. Graduate Division uses the postdoc listserv maintained by the PSA along with a listserv for all postdocs under the Visiting Postdoctoral Scholars title code to disseminate information. Postdocs are appointed under 3 title codes: 3370 (Visiting Postdoctoral Scholar), 999A (Postgraduate Researcher – with full benefits), and 2726 (Resident Physician/subspecialty). Postdocs with fellowships (own funding) are hired under the visiting postdoctoral scholar’s title. At the last count there were 714 postdocs under title code 3370 and approximately 1300 overall. Currently, the Graduate Division does not keep track of salaries, but according to a Fall Quarter 2000 survey (n=73), they range from approximately 27 to 35K (salaries are probably higher now). In terms of health insurance, PGRs have full benefits. Non-payroll appointments are eligible for group health insurance (UniCARE or Health Net) that includes medical, dental, vision, life and long-term disability (funding for premiums is negotiable: department, fellowship allowance, or individual scholar). Visiting postdoctoral scholars on payroll appointments are eligible for this plan as well. However, as employees, they are eligible for “Limited Career Benefits” or Core Benefits, depending on percent time and length of appointment. Mentorship guidelines for postdocs currently do not exist, but are being considered by Graduate Council. Postdocs are expected to resolve grievances informally at the department or school level. Campus Mediation Program and the Faculty & Staff Assistance Program (FSAP) are also available to postdocs. Formal grievances follow the Non-Senate Academic Appointees Grievance Procedures. Services for International Students and Scholars assist foreign postdocs but is traditionally understaffed. In theory postdocs are eligible for faculty/staff housing and financial need housing, but availability is very limited (wait list is ~ 1 year). There are 3 childcare centers on campus. Postdocs are eligible (20-25% of children in childcare are those of postdocs) but availability is limited (current waiting list is ~350 individuals). Postdocs are encouraged to use the Career Center (together with graduate students and alumni). Other career/professional development services are available, usually for a small fee (e.g., Academic Enrichment Program).
• UC Santa Cruz (Renee Baran): Dean of Graduate Studies (Frank Talamantes) is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. A new Assistant Dean, Sandra Pacheco, is responsible specifically for postdoctoral affairs (20% time). This is a new responsibility for the graduate deans, and they are still in the process of setting up the details of how they will administer postdocs. All appointees receive appointment letters from the Divisional Academic deans. Campuswide postdoc information is now maintained by Graduate Studies, and individual academic divisions maintain records (appointment letters, etc.). There are approximately 50-70 postdocs at UCSC (mostly in the Biology Department), under basically 2 title codes: 3370 (Visiting Postdoctoral – temporary employees for up to 3 years, limited benefits, salary is negotiable, ~70%) and 3240 (Postgraduate Researcher – with full benefits, salary between 31 and 45K, 20-25%). Some postdocs may be appointed under the Academic Research series (salary starts at 51K) and Research Specialist series (salary starts at 31K). The actual salaries earned are not known at this time. All postdocs with outside funding are hired initially as visiting postdocs (3370). When postdocs are paid entirely from an outside fellowship, the appointment is for 0% time. Mentorship guidelines for postdocs currently do not exist. Postdocs are academic appointees covered under the policies specified for “non-academic senate academic appointees not covered by a union contract”. Visa services and advising is provided on an individual basis (same as for other employees). Postdocs are technically eligible for Faculty Housing, but the wait list is based on a tiered system that makes it impossible for postdocs to have meaningful access to campus housing. Postdocs have access to childcare services (wait list) and career services together with students. Three months of service at the Career Center is $35 (students pay as well). The Career Center is trying to hire someone to specifically advice graduate students and postdocs.
• UC Berkeley (Mary O’Riordan and Dagmar Truckses): The Vice Chancellor of Research is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. The Director of Sponsored Projects (variable time) and the Visiting Scholar and Postdoc Affairs (VSPA) Coordinator (100% time) also handle postdoc affairs. The VSPA Application, Ethnic Survey Form, Patent Acknowledgement and Appointment Letter are used for postdoc appointments (but not always in a timely manner). The VSPA Program maintains records and statistics on postdocs. Campus directives, articles in the Research Advocate (a newsletter sent to PIs) and in the Berkeleyan (the campus newspaper for faculty and staff), and direct mailings are used to disseminate information about postdoc affairs. On a given day, there are about 900 postdocs at Berkeley (~1200/year), under basically 2 title codes: 3370 (Visiting Postdoctoral Employee – temporary employees, limited benefits with no dental and no UCRS, 65%) and 3296 (Visiting Stipend Postdoctoral Fellow – with no benefits but access to self-paid or departmentally-paid health insurance, 25 %). Fellowship recipients (10%) have a working title of “Visiting Research Fellow” and are virtually invisible on campus. Salaries range from 30 (minimum) to 45K in the 3370 Visiting Postdoctoral title code. Salary is open for 3296 fellows (Visiting Stipend Postdoctoral Fellows). Mentorship guidelines for postdocs do not exist. Postdocs are covered under the Postdoctoral Fellow Grievance Procedure approved by the Graduate Council in 1999, but there is no informal mediation. The Services for International Students and Scholars Office assists postdocs by having a campus orientation and workshops. Currently, there are virtually no housing services for postdocs on campus other than access to listings of available rentals and a waiting list to University Village with lower priority than students. Access to childcare is available, but with very limited space and long wait lists. There is a career center that postdocs can use with one part-time Ph.D. counselor. Visiting Postdoc Employees have access to campus Human Resource’s training and development classes for a fee.
• Stanford University (Chris Karlovich): There are about 1300-1500 postdocs at Stanford. The Stanford University Postdoc Association (SUPD) met with the Provost several times and a committee was appointed (4 postdocs, 2 faculty and the Assistant Dean of Postdoc Affairs). A set of recommendations was submitted to the Provost. The main issue is salary (pay a minimum of 33-34K for 2 years) and Bay Area high cost of living (pay a premium above NRSA scale). Some departments have already set up minimums of 34-35K. Supplemental money for salaries will have to come from the university (soft money, administration, departments, etc.). The second major issue is status: postdocs have a "non-matriculated graduate student" status and pay tuition (that was lowered from $1,000 to $125/quarter thanks to SUPD efforts), and Stanford postdocs want to have their own classification status (postdoctoral fellows). Another important issue is housing (postdocs want some housing aid). Child care, appointment letters, grievance procedures, etc. are all part of the proposal as well. SUPD has been working with the administration on these issues for quite some time now. If no reasonable progress takes place soon, SUPD is considering a demonstration or a rally (e.g., a “morning without science”). Stanford postdocs are also considering unionization as a last resort if no progress is made, but this route can take several years and may antagonize the university. In this case, postdocs cannot be easily replaced so the university would have to negotiate.

(5) Discuss Plan of Action. The CPS will be asked at future CoGD and CCGA meetings to submit an official list of recommendations. The CPS members decided to develop a prioritized list of recommendations and issues regarding postdoctoral affairs at the University of California. Responsibility to develop an actual proposal (a summary with a rationale) for each recommendation/issue will be delegated to CPS representatives from each campus. The prioritized list follows:

(i) Universal full benefits (medical, dental and vision) and access to disability insurance.
• Fully paid by university or fellowship agency.
• Comparable to staff benefits (with no absolute need for retirement benefits).
• In charge: Renee Baran, UC Santa Cruz.

(ii) Establishment of a minimum postdoctoral salary scale:
• Equivalent to current NIH levels.
• Minimum of $32,000 (with cost of living adjustments).
• Yearly increases (in conjunction with staff increases).
• Step increases to account for years of experience.
• In charge: Tom Peavy, UC Davis.

(iii) Appointments should be at 100% level, unless requested by exception with the Dean:
• In charge: Tara Chapman, UC San Diego.

(iv) Title code(s) specific for postdoctoral scholars:
• Ph.D. required.
• UC systemwide.
• Allowing for principal investigator status (to allow securing intra and extramural funds).
• In charge: Luanna Putney, UC San Francisco.

(v) Mandatory offer/appointment letter and job posting.
• Advertise jobs (job posting)
• Letter with description of job, salary, % appointment, benefits.
• Open format.
• In charge: Luanna Putney, UC San Francisco.

(vi) Appropriate staff support to administer postdoctoral affairs (e.g., postdoctoral coordinator):
• Request allocation of money for staff to specifically support postdocs.
• At least 1 full-time staff support per campus, proportionate to the number of postdocs on campus (e.g., 1 full-time staff/250 postdocs).
• In charge: Curtis Thompson, UC San Diego.

(vii) Establishment of appropriate and consistent grievance and mediation procedures:
• Informal and formal procedures for postdocs.
• Specific and appropriate for the postdoc-mentor relationship.
• In charge: Dagmar Truckses, UC Berkeley.

(viii) Postdoctoral scholar appointments limited to a maximum of 5 years:
• Employment would have to change to a regular academic (e.g., specialist series, professional research series) or staff (e.g., SRA) title after 5 years.
• In charge: Mary O’Riordan, UC Berkeley.

(6) The next UC Systemwide meeting of the CPS will be sponsored by the UC San Diego during Winter Quarter, 2002. The specific date, time and location will be announced by e-mail.

Meeting adjourned at 3:43 PM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

Prepared by Paulo Verardi, UC Davis Postdoctoral Scholars Association Secretary/Treasurer.

2002-02-09, UC San Diego, Minutes

“University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) -- February 9, 2002 Meeting”

Minutes of the February 9, 2002 meeting (sponsored by the University of California, San Diego).

Meeting location and time: Conference Room 111A, UC San Diego, 10:00 AM to 3:30 PM.

Meeting called to order at 10:05 AM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

(1) Welcome and opening comments by Tom Peavy. At this point, all nine UC campuses are represented at the UC Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS). The CPS was formed last May out of a need to talk to the administration regarding systemwide postdoctoral issues, and is now an organization recognized within the UC system by the UC Office of the President (UCOP), the Council of Graduate Deans (CoGD), and the Coordinating Committee on Graduate Affairs (CCGA). The objectives of this meeting are: (1) to discuss the creation of systemwide postdoctoral title codes with CCGA chair Charles Perrin and CoGD representatives Jean Fort and Richard Attiyeh; (2) to update postdoc representatives as to the status of postdoctoral affairs on their campuses; (3) to discuss the CPS “List of Recommendations”; and (4) to decide on future plans. The postdoc title code issue is broad and includes identifying postdocs, benefits (health coverage), leave policies, appointment letters, salaries, grievance policies, written evaluations, mentorship guidelines, administrative support (e.g., postdoc coordinators), and career services.

Campus representatives present:
• UC Berkeley – Dagmar Truckses
• UC Davis – Tom Peavy and Paulo Verardi
• UC Irvine – Grace Stutzmann
• UC Riverside – Xiangyang Zhou
• UC San Diego – Tara Chapman and Raymond Clark
• UC San Francisco – Luanna Putney
• UC Santa Cruz – Jennifer Armstrong

Invited participants:
• Richard Attiyeh – Vice Chancellor for Research, Dean of Graduate Studies, UCSD
• Jean Fort – Assistant Dean, Academic Planning and Research, Office of Graduate Studies and Research (OGSR), member of the CoGD
• Charles Perrin – Professor, Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, UCSD. Chair of the Committee on Coordinating Graduate Affairs (CCGA)
• Megan Houseweart – Stanford University, Stanford University Postdoc Association representative

(2) Jean Fort, UCSD, Assistant Dean, Academic Planning and Research, Office of Graduate Studies and Research (OGSR).

The administration estimates that there are about 5,000 postdocs at the UC system. About 3,000 are funded by faculty research grants and are in the employee category. The other 2000 are fellow trainees, with their own national fellowships, foreign-funded fellowships (international agencies and governments), or funds from training grants received by faculty for postdoc training (e.g., NIH training grants). Out of these 2,000, about 1,500 have their stipend paid through the UC system, and 500 are paid directly by funding agencies. A very small number of postdocs are self-supporting. There are over 100 agencies that fund postdocs, each with their own regulations. There are also federal grant policies, and federal and state laws that need to be addressed. The administration is attempting to place postdocs in a separate group distinct from faculty, students and staff.

The postdoc issue has been recognized nationally in the last 5 years. The Graduate Deans in 1998 put together a Report on Postdoctoral Education at UC with a list of recommendations. The recommendations have been reviewed by several sectors of the administration and faculty, and the CoGD is now refining the policies. A totally consistent treatment is not possible because of the different agency requirements. The policies are being discussed now with the UCOP. The proposal is to create two different academic title codes for postdocs. One will be for postdoc employees and the other for postdoc fellows. All salaries would be paid through the payroll system (as currently done at UCB and UCSD), which would make all postdocs eligible for benefits (medical, dental and vision). NIH insists that fellows and trainees are not employees of the University, and therefore fellows would not be in the retirement system and would not be eligible for Medicare. However, fellows would be eligible for UC voluntary investment programs such as the Defined Contribution (DC) Plan and the Tax-Deferred 403(b) Plan. Final approval from the UCOP is pending, as both federal and state laws affect these policies. The policies will include worker’s compensation coverage for fellows (with a medical component and a salary stipend), sick and vacation leave (if the funding agency does not have overriding policies), as well as parental and family leave. In summary, fellows will only not be eligible for retirement, Medicare, and unemployment insurance.

Postdoc salaries and stipends are mostly externally funded and therefore subject to funding agency regulations. For postdoc employees, the postgraduate researcher (PGR) series payscale (currently ranging from about 31 to 46 K) would be broadened. The lower range (floor) is not established at this point but the current suggestion is 25K (for fellows). The upper range has also not been specified as yet but would be higher than the current scale. A period of adjustment (grandfathering) would be necessary. A broad minimum and maximum salary scale would be implemented and then it would be up to each campus to determine the criteria to decide salaries, which could include the discipline, years of experience, area of research, etc. A five-year limit on a postdoc title would be part of the recommendation. A new title is under consideration for postdocs that complete their training, since professional researcher salary scales are now quite high (starting at 54K). The new series (which is already in place at UCSD), called the Project Scientist, would start at 44-45K. People in this series are not independent investigators but make substantial original contributions to projects. This series would allow the advancement of postdocs that complete their training to a career position intermediate between postdoc and professional researcher. These title codes are due for review within the next 3-4 months, and would be effective at the earliest next fall.

With the new postdoc titles, 100% appointments would be required with exception permitted at the request of the postdoc. Appointment letters and mentor evaluations are under discussion. Guidelines and minimum requirements for grievance procedures would be outlined and then campuses would establish them. Guidelines and minimum requirements for termination of postdocs are also under consideration. In terms of implementation, current postdocs would have a choice to be granfathered into their present title or change to the new title codes.

(3) Charles Perrin, UCSD, Chair of the Committee on Coordinating Graduate Affairs (CCGA).

CCGA is the systemwide Academic Senate body responsible for all graduate education. The main duties of CCGA are to advice the President and administration in issues regarding graduate education (and to some extent research), and to approve, modify and review programs for graduate degrees. CCGA also coordinates with Graduate Councils. The CCGA has a chair, a vice-chair, and nine members (one from each campus). There are also administration representatives (UCOP, CoGD), and two graduate student representatives that are elected by the Graduate Student Associations. Postdocs are officially under the charge of Graduate Deans, but are also part of the responsibility of Graduate Councils. A postdoc representative is being considered by CCGA now that there is a systemwide postdoc association (before postdocs participated at meetings only unofficially).

The faculty is generally supportive of the current proposals, but there are some concerns. Full health coverage is absolutely required, even though there is the issue how it will be funded by some fellowships. Life insurance and retirement is up to postdocs. Regarding leave policy, there is a concern with regard to timing of grant renewal for postdocs funded by faculty research grants. If a postdoc takes a lot of time off, grants may not be renewed, as it may be hard to find temporary replacement of postdoc duties. Regarding the minimum salary, the CCGA generally supports a minimum salary, depending on the final figure. CCGA worries that if the minimum is too high, postdocs may be placed out of the market. The NIH payscale is being raised to levels that are too high compared to other funding agencies such as NSF. A broad scale with a high maximum is necessary for certain areas such as engineering, but the minimum must accommodate funding agencies other than NIH. The 100% appointment rule is supported, but needs the exception for postdocs that have family, teaching or other responsibilities. The issues of appointment letters, written evaluations, strengthening mentoring relationships, and grievance procedures are fully supported by the CCGA. Career planning is a problem. Career centers are overwhelmed with undergraduate and graduate students. Centers are funded by student fees and provide services mostly to undergraduate students.

(4) Roundtable discussion and comments:

Asst. Dean Fort commented that the new postdoc titles would be distinct from the PGR title, which could eventually be phased out. Fellows would be paid through payroll, but the salary would be considered a stipend (fellows would get a 1099 instead of a W-2). A small number of visiting foreign scholars paid by foreign agencies will still need individual enrollment through health care facilitators to be eligible for health benefits.

Regarding who will pay for fellow health benefits, Asst. Dean Fort mentioned that for NIH, the institutional allowance will fully cover health care benefits expenses in 2 years. Some departments are offering supplemental funding for it now. For agencies that do not provide funds for health insurance (or not enough), the UC administration will start putting pressure on the agencies to provide supplemental funding. One of the proposals would be that if an agency does not come up with the funds, there would be an employer contribution by the university to come up with the difference. Each campus will determine how to come up with the supplemental funds.

The 25K minimum salary for the new postdoc titles was emphatically protested by CPS members as being outrageously low, even though it is only the floor and the payscale is broad. CPS members felt that PIs will hire postdocs at the set floor by default, regardless of the broad payscale. The CPS agrees that a 25K minimum would be better than no minimum, but 25K is not a living wage for Ph.D. professionals and undervalues the services they provide for the institution. If some postdocs are being paid outrageously low salaries (sometimes as low as 10K at UCSD as quoted by Asst. Dean Fort), it is no justification to set all postdoc salaries at such a low level. Besides, mentors who pay their postdocs such low salaries will in all likelihood continue to do so even when a minimum salary is set by administration. In addition, such a low figure would put forth a “negative image” of the UC system, which would not be as attractive to postdocs nationwide as other universities, consequently compromising the quality of research performed at the UC system. It is the opinion of the CPS that if a PI does not have the funds to support a postdoc at a decent level of salary with benefits, then they should not hire one. Funding agencies such as NSF have stated that they will increase their allowances for postdocs. Asst. Dean Fort mentioned that the salary floor would be re-evaluated after 2 years in the current proposal. Vice Chancellor and Dean Attiyeh suggested that the University should be commissioned to do a cost-of-living study for each campus, to help them set their own campus minimum salaries. That would provide individual campuses flexibility to raise their minimums above the systemwide minimums. Asst. Dean Fort mentioned that according to the proposal, each campus would decide how to apply the payscale for the new titles (e.g., based on years of experience, etc.). Concerns raised by CPS members also included the differential treatment of fellow postdocs regarding leave policies.

CPS members also emphasized the need to allow postdocs to have PI status to secure intra- and extramural funds that are targeted to young investigators, as a means to prove their ability to secure funds. This ability is highly sought by search committees when applying for assistant professorships. Asst. Dean Fort mentioned that PI exceptions are handled differently at each campus. At UCSD, PI exceptions are granted to postdocs with the understanding that if the grant is funded, the postdoc needs to be moved to a research position such as Assistant Project Scientist or Assistant Researcher.

Lunch break: 12:06 PM – 1:07 PM

(5) Updates on postdoctoral affairs by campus representatives:

(i) UC Davis (Tom Peavy): During last year the Postdoctoral Scholars Association (PSA) at UC Davis developed a list of recommendations that was submitted to Graduate Council last February. The Council provided a point-by-point response that basically accepts all of our recommendations (full benefits, salary at NIH minimum level, etc.). The Academic Senate is now reviewing the recommendations and in the March 8 meeting they will talk about the input they received from faculty. Another issue at Davis now is staff support at Graduate Studies to deal with postdoctoral affairs. The PSA is working with the Graduate Dean (Cristina González) and the Provost (Virginia Hinshaw) to get staff support specific to postdocs. We almost lost our Science Nextwave campus subscription but the Provost provided funds for the subscription. Our new Provost seems to be supportive of postdocs. Graduate Studies has provided the PSA with $3,000 last year and $3,000 again this year.

(ii) UC Irvine (Grace Stutzmann): Grace Stutzmann and Karen Nowak are the new representatives from Irvine. Tom Peavy read a statement from Grace and Karen: “The task of coordinating a database of the postdoctoral trainees at UCI is presently ongoing. At present, there is no mechanism in place with which to exclusively access the postdoc population at UCI, and this is one of our first priorities. We could not accurately represent the collective views of the postdocs here without such a system. An administrative position does exist which covers postdoc affairs and programming/coordination, which primarily involves policy development, agency funding, healthcare and insurance processing. Both Karen Nowak and I are working with this administrator to create a postdoc listserv so we can communicate with the estimated 300 postdocs on campus. Once given access to this list, we will forward the relevant information and collect feedback from the UCI community. Once the purpose of the CPS is communicated through the proper channels, we hope to present a more thorough depiction of postdoc views from UCI in the near future.”

(iii) UC San Diego (Tara Chapman and Raymond Clark): Tara and Raymond are trying to set up a listserv to attract the attention of postdocs on campus (UCSD is spread out). Jennifer Oh, the part-time (50%) administrator in charge of postdocs, is having a hard time tracking postdocs on campus. The goals are to form a formal postdoc association and to get postdoc representation at the Graduate Council. Tom mentioned that one of the best ways to contact postdocs is to get a list of MSOs (Management Services Officers) and ask them to identify postdocs in their units/departments (at UC Davis there is an administrative listserv of MSOs).

(iv) Stanford University (Megan Houseweart): Stanford postdocs were recently moving towards unionization, but due to some progress and the willingness of Stanford to negotiate, they have held off. The Stanford University Postdoc Association (SUPD) has placed major efforts in:
• Increased salary (Stanford minimums raised to 34K and are enforced by the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs).
• Improved childcare for postdocs (SUPD survey results made University realize the problem, $2,500 per child subsidy possible by Fall 2002 through “private funds”).
• Pre-tax spending plans (in place by Fall 2002). Stanford postdocs have a "non-matriculated graduate student" status, pay tuition (that was lowered from $1,000 to $125/quarter thanks to SUPD efforts), and are currently not eligible for such plans.
• Disability/life insurance plans (adopted Winter 2002).
• Maternity/vacation/sick leave policies (drafted and nearly approved).
SUPD ongoing efforts:
• Uniform postdoctoral scholar status other than “non-matriculated graduate student” (under consideration).
• Career Center benefits (workshops, databases, and panels).
• Housing subsidies (temporary housing for incoming postdocs, on-campus housing for postdocs).
• Better benefits (retirement accounts, paid dental plan, and dentist recommendations web page). The recommendations web page is being considered for PIs, restaurants, etc.
• Lobby Congress to change laws regarding supplementation of postdocs on fellowships. This is one area where help from the UC CPS would be beneficial.

(v) UC Berkeley (Dagmar Truckses): The Vice Chancellor for Research is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. A task force on postdoc affairs has been intimately involved in the proposal presented by Asst. Dean Fort. The Berkeley Postdoctoral Association (BPA) is trying to work on specific items:
• Communicating and reaching postdocs. The administration has a mailing list (not an e-mail list) of all postdocs. The current BPA listserv (voluntary subscription) has turned into a “for rent/for sale” e-mail list. Half of the postdocs like it and half hate it (some have unsubscribed to the list).
• Last Nov/Dec, the BPA sent out a newsletter with a survey focusing on salaries, rent, living conditions, childcare concerns, visa, etc. The administration got interested and compiled the results (n=58), which will be posted on the BPA web page.
• A three-page long FAQ will be posted on the BPA web page next week. The administration has promised now for three years to publish a “Postdoc Handbook” but that has not happened yet. The administration does not have yet a web site with postdoc affairs information.
• Considering the current budget crisis, at this point the administration does not have money to hire more staff for postdoc affairs.
• The Graduate Division used to give up to $10,000 for career advancement: workshops, etc. Now the Vice Chancellor for Research will only give money for career-related events, but not for social events (i.e., postdoc receptions). Once a year they put together a postdoc pizza parlor. They are considering having an orientation for new postdocs in addition to the new-employee orientation.
• The BPA wants to get representation at Graduate Council.

(vi) UC Santa Cruz (Jennifer Armstrong): We estimate that there are 50-70 postdocs at UC Santa Cruz (mostly in the Biology Department). A new Assistant Dean, Sandra Pacheco, is responsible specifically for postdoctoral affairs (20% time). She and the new Dean of Graduate Studies are very sympathetic of postdocs. Dean Pacheco will be meeting with postdocs in a couple of weeks to discuss title codes and Graduate Council representation will be discussed. Results from a survey conducted December 1999 were presented previously by Renee Baran. Postdocs at the Biology Department now have a mailbox. For the first time postdocs hosted a seminar speaker. The major concerns now are that the postdoc organization is unofficial and that the original seven or so members who initiated the organization are now moving on. Jennifer will look into registering the organization as a campus interest group or organization and getting people involved so that there is continuity to the group. They will also look into finding postdocs at other departments. At this point, the organization has an e-mail list of postdocs only at the Biology Department.

(vii) UC San Francisco (Luanna Putney): The PSA was established about 5 years ago. About 3 years ago, the primary goal of the PSA was to establish a seminar series (Practice of Science Series) to bring people involved in careers in science (academic, industry, alternative). Today the PSA has a core group comprising the president, a vice-president (Luanna), a Treasurer and a Secretary. To run the Practice of Science Series there are 3-4 other postdocs. We have general meetings 3-4 times/year (attendance is about 20-30 people). Now funding has been secured for the next three years from the seven basic science departments ($20,000/per year) to support career development for postdocs (i.e., Practice of Science series, networking and social events). Every year the PSA writes a progress report. The new director of the Career Center is very supportive of postdocs and the PSA has contributed some money to the Center to host speakers. The PSA has also sponsored programs in the Life Sciences (mentoring luncheons, speakers) and the Student Academic Enrichment Program (workshops on Powerpoint, grant-writing skills, teaching, etc.). Just like the Career Center, their office is sponsored by Graduate Student fees. They are willing to accommodate postdocs but have no funds. The PSA is also sponsoring an Alumni Gala in a couple of weeks at the San Francisco MoMA to bring alumni, postdocs, faculty, and graduate students together, emphasizing networking.

About one year ago an Assistant Dean of Postdoctoral Affairs (Christine Des Jarlais) was appointed 50% time on postdoc affairs. They are hiring a new assistant primarily for postdocs. Asst. Dean De Jarlais and the Dean of Graduate Studies (Cliff Attkisson) have done an orientation for postdocs in October (there will be one in spring) with information booths from Child Services, Medical Benefits, etc. The PSA has had a representative at Graduate Council for the last 4 years. A list of recommendations was developed and about 6 months ago Graduate Council approved it (with salaries based on nothing less than the NIH minimum). Now the recommendations are being discussed by the Academic Senate. Dean Attkisson wants to focus on local issues (such as mentoring guidelines), since issues such as benefits and so on are being discussed at the systemwide level through CoGD. As far as communication, there are about 1,000-1,200 postdocs of which 750 are considered postdoctoral scholars and are managed through the Graduate Division (PGRs and postdocs in the clinical series are not managed/accounted by Graduate Division). The PSA listserv has about 150 voluntary subscriptions and is a great way to announce seminars and events.

(viii) UC Riverside (Xiangyang Zhou): UC Riverside is rapidly growing. Now there are about 225 postdocs at UC Riverside, but we have no postdoctoral network and no interaction amongst postdocs on campus. There is no postdoc association or e-mail listserv. With the help of UC Riverside Graduate Council, I am doing a survey of postdocs at UC Riverside to try to understand their needs in research, salaries, benefits, and the importance of a postdoctoral association at UC Riverside. This survey is in progress and the data may be obtained in the next two weeks. An e-mail listserv is also being set up, as I now have the e-mail of about 50% of the postdocs. Following this work, we hope to assemble a postdoctoral association at UC Riverside campus to serve our postdoc community.

(6) Discuss the CPS “List of Recommendations”. At our last meeting, the CPS decided to develop a prioritized list of recommendations and issues regarding postdoctoral affairs at the University of California. Responsibility to develop an actual proposal (a summary with a rationale) for each recommendation/issue was delegated to CPS representatives from each campus. At the CoGD meeting last October, Tom was asked to submit an official list of prioritized recommendations for the postdoctoral title codes. Tom submitted a memo to Ellen Switkes in November describing the recommendations without great detail. Now we are down to specifics and we need to write a finalized version of the recommendations (particularly regarding the title code).

The consensus is that the proposal by the administration on title codes is satisfactory except for the minimum salary and the lack of support from the chair of CCGA for leave policies and career services. Even though having a minimum of 25K is better than having no minimum, we expect an established 25K minimum to become the default salary for postdocs, and to have a negative impact on how the UC system is seen nationwide. The consensus was to request a baseline salary that reflects the high-skilled services provided by postdocs (unlinked from the NIH payscale) and ask for cost-of-living adjustments for each campus. Regarding leave policies, postdocs want standard leave policies (similar to faculty and staff ). Even though it is “hard to find temporary replacement of postdoc duties” as stated by the CCGA Chair Perrin, there is no logic behind singling-out postdocs, as PIs and other investigators would be hard to replace as well if they would be on leave.

It is NIH policy that fellowship recipients cannot be supplemented by other NIH moneys (only moneys from other funds). Similarly, it is NIH policy that fellows cannot be considered employees by their training institutions. These NIH policies hurt NIH postdoc fellowship recipients. The CPS will gather more information and will consider lobbying Congress to change this policy at a later meeting.

Regarding career training, postdocs need (and as trainees are supposed to be provided) pedagogical and career training, workshops, management classes, etc. Support for postdoc career services and development is essential. The CPS should look at how much Graduate Students pay for career services and ask the administration for money to cover these expenses from training grants, etc.

(7) Decide on future plans.

(i) Finalize draft of list of recommendations, approve it through e-mail, and distribute it to UCOP, CCGA, CoGD, and campus Graduate Councils.

(ii) Science NextWave meeting. The Postdoc Network is inviting postdocs to attend the second national Postdoc Network meeting “Implementation 2002: Opportunities for Collaboration” on 20 April 2002 in Washington, D.C. Tom contacted Laure Haak for a chance to present the work of CPS and there will be a spot for the CPS. Tom will go and he wants more council members to participate.

(8) Discuss organizational bylaws. The CPS is now an officially recognized organization. Perhaps now is the time to formalize our organizational bylaws (e.g., mission, election of chair and officers, one postdoc representative with voting privileges per campus, etc.). Graduate Deans should supply money for campus representatives to travel to CPS meetings. Officers should be elected through the CPS or campus PSAs, and be required to find a replacement if leaving duties. We will have a draft of the bylaws for discussion at the next meeting.

(9) Minutes from previous CPS meeting (09/22/2001) approved.

(10) The next UC Systemwide meeting of the CPS will be sponsored by the UC San Francisco during Spring Quarter, 2002. The specific date, time and location will be announced by e-mail.

(11) Tom thanked the UC San Diego campus, and in particular Tara Chapman and Raymond Clark, for organizing and hosting the CPS meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 3:37 PM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

Prepared by Paulo Verardi, UC Davis Postdoctoral Scholars Association Secretary/Treasurer.

2002-06-01, UC San Francisco, Minutes

“University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) -- June 1, 2002 Meeting”

Minutes of the June 1, 2002 meeting (sponsored by the University of California, San Francisco).

Meeting location and time: School of Nursing Building, Room N-527, UC San Francisco, 10:00 AM to 4:00 PM.

Meeting called to order at 10:17 AM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

(1) Welcome and opening comments by Tom Peavy. In May of 2001, the UC Council of Postdoctoral Scholars (CPS) was formed out of a need to talk to the administration regarding systemwide postdoctoral issues, and is now an official, recognized organization within the UC system. The objectives of this meeting are: (1) to discuss the creation of new postdoctoral title codes in the UC system and other postdoc issues with Ellen Switkes from the UC Office of the President (UCOP), Dean Cliff Attkisson from the Council of Graduate Deans (CoGD), and Assistant Dean Christine Des Jarlais (UCSF); (2) to update fellow postdoctoral representatives as to the status of postdoctoral affairs on their campuses; (3) to report on the 2nd National Postdoc Meeting sponsored by the Postdoc Network; (4) to discuss the value of a national postdoc association; (5) to decide on future plans; and (6) to discuss organizational bylaws.

Campus representatives present:
• UC Berkeley – Amber Budden
• UC Davis – Tom Peavy and Paulo Verardi
• UC Irvine – Grace Stutzmann
• UC Los Angeles – Lisa Rogers
• UC Riverside – Azizul Haque
• UC San Francisco – Richard Price
• UC Santa Cruz – Jennifer Armstrong

Invited participants:
• Ellen S. Switkes – Assistant Vice President, Academic Advancement, UCOP
• Clifford Attkisson – Dean of Graduate Studies, UCSF
• Christine Des Jarlais – Assistant Dean of Graduate Outreach and Postdoctoral Affairs, Graduate Studies, UCSF
• Megan Houseweart, Joseph Schulz, and Florian Ausfelder – Stanford University, campus representatives

(2) Ellen Switkes, Assistant Vice President, Academic Advancement, UCOP.

Currently, the UC system has about 5000 postdocs. It is hard to know who a postdoc is (and therefore account precisely the number of postdocs), as there are multiple title codes in which postdocs are employed. As part of a national and state effort, UC is putting together a set of policies for postdocs. There are 3 categories of postdocs at UC: employees paid by UC (about 3000), fellows paid by UC, and fellows paid by outside agencies (non-employees). There are about 2000 fellows. The goal is to have policies that are as uniform as possible amongst the 3 categories.

The effective date for implementation of the new policies is estimated to be July 1, 2003. The actual policy is now being drafted and will be available for official review in the fall. Implementation will be phased-in over 3 years. Personnel aspects of the new policies will probably be effective immediately, but salaries will be phased-in to allow research grants to be updated.

UC will have a discreet title code for postdocs. Most postdocs are paid through university funds. Most postdoc fellows are also paid through UC (payroll or other way). Even the fewer than 200 postdoc fellows with their own money (from foreign governments and organizations) will also be paid through UC. Postdocs will be allowed to be employed in these titles for a maximum of 5 years (including previous postdoc employment outside UC). After 5 years, other academic titles for researchers will have to be employed. Appointments will be only at 100% (exceptions will be allowed only at the request of the postdoc). Postdocs will have appointment letters and annual evaluations with advisors (written evaluations will be provided when requested).

CPS members recommended that postdoc evaluations of advisors, at the time of merit and promotion, should be part of their merit/promotion package, to include postdoc feedback.

Work is still being done on grievance and dismissal procedures for postdocs. Vacation accrual will be 10 hrs/month, sick leave 8 hrs/month, and parental, family, and medical leave will be standard. Regarding salaries, the minimum salary (floor) will start at 29K in July 1, 2003 and will be automatically adjusted to about 31K at the end of the implementation period. Not all postdocs will automatically have the floor salary during implementation if the grants that fund the position do not allocate that level of salary. The ultimate floor of 31K will be automatically range adjusted annually, as are other academic titles. Individual campuses can set their own (higher) floors.

Regarding benefits, employee health insurance will be available for all postdocs. Dental and vision may not happen right away. Worker’s compensation, disability, etc. will be provided as for other employees. Postdocs will be able to participate in the voluntary savings program (not sure for non-employee fellows).

(3) Clifford Attkisson, Dean of Graduate Studies, UCSF.

Dialog regarding postdocs within UC has improved tremendously. UC has to remain competitive for the best postdocs and there are costs associated with it. The CPS is commended for presenting its message in a positive, strong way without antagonizing administrators and faculty. Dean Attkisson urged the CPS to continue to participate in the meetings with administrators and faculty.

The CoGD is now analyzing data from different campuses. The lack of fund sources for extramurally-funded postdocs (e.g., American Heart and American Cancer Associations) is a major point. UCSF has been able to supplement support to such postdocs without approval form the Regents. However, vacation and benefits for fellow appointees supported by the government (e.g., NSF, NIH, etc.) has been challenging.

Tom suggested that groups like the CPS can interact directly with these problematic agencies to advocate new policies. Dean Attkisson mentioned that the Office of Graduate Outreach and Postdoctoral Affairs can help compile a list of problematic agencies.

Regarding postdoctoral compensation, the expected final figure for the minimum (31K) is a nice tight floor and the title will have a very high ceiling , with the added advantage that it can be cost-adjusted over time. This policy will elevate the postdoc title to a universitywide entity, subject to the same adjustments and supports of other series, and will also include the limitations we all want (e.g., 5 year maximum), plus the ability to make a meaningful and relatively easy transition to other series that offer lifetime benefits such as retirement.

(4) Christine Des Jarlais, Assistant Dean of Graduate Outreach and Postdoctoral Affairs, Graduate Studies, UCSF.

This newly-created position at UCSF (postdoctoral affairs) is a direct result of the recommendations by the UCSF PSA. The office has two people, of which 1/2 deals with postdoc matters. Dean Des Jarlais is the “point” person regarding postdoc issues. At one level she serves as an advocate for postdocs, helping to demystify the postdoc experience (typically postdocs are appointed with limited information). However, in one specific area (grievances), Dean Des Jarlais has a third-party objective role, looking both at the concerns of postdocs and at the integrity of the institution.

A discussion of the pros and cons of having such a dual role initiated. One suggestion was that the grievance aspect of it should be delegated to another party. Another suggestion was that postdoc peers should be included in the grievance procedure.

Dean Des Jarlais also serves as a representative to the systemwide CoGD subcommittee dealing with postdoc issues and with the Graduate Council at UCSF, where she is the Chair of a subcommittee in charge of developing mentoring guidelines for postdocs.

The 1999 Manual for Postdoctoral Appointments is being revised, and an official Graduate Division Postdoc website is being developed to disseminate information. It will have specific links for postdocs, PIs (to get guidelines for hiring, sample letters for appointments, etc.), and postdoc administrators. It will be ready by mid-Fall, at which time efforts will be made to inform departments and faculty.

The Office is also developing a comprehensive postdoc listserv for official announcements, separate from the self-subscribe PSA listserv. UCSF will add on to the minimum UCOP recommendations (such as the floor minimum). Finally, at each October and April, there is a Postdoc Reception and Orientation Fair, in which support units on campus set up information booths and give information packages to postdocs, particularly newly-arrived postdocs.

(5) Roundtable Discussion.

Tom expressed his concern about the “wall” of implementation. What will prevent the manipulation of percent appointments, etc. to circumvent the new title? Ellen mentioned that the space standard will be the major one. Campuses want space counted and since staff does not get counted (only faculty, postdocs and students are counted), they will want to make sure all postdocs are counted. Dean Attkisson mentioned that he hopes the PGR series will eventually be retired. He said that the objectives are to prevent people from being cheap, exploited, “unbenefited” labor, and to allow postdocs to be protected by university policies. Dean Des Jarlais said that there will be guidelines, and that information and communication will be the key for implementation.

Tom asked where funds could come from to help support postdoc coordinators, career services for postdocs, and the PSAs and CPS (e.g., overhead from grants, UCOP funds, etc.?). Ellen said that individual campuses have control over their money, and that this will have to be worked out at each campus. Dean Attkisson suggested an appointment fee to be paid by the funding source that pays for the health insurance, to fund these services.

Tom asked what the CPS could do to help the approval of the new APM. Ellen suggested to get involved in Graduate Councils to introduce the topic and help with questions. Richard Price suggested compiling a Statement of Support. Dean Attkisson suggested that the PSAs should have a permanent member at Graduate Councils and relevant subcommittees. He also suggested to have a postdoc representative at CCGA permanently, and to work together with Senate leaders at each campus for when it comes time for them to review these policies. Finally, he suggested to work with faculty leaders that are powerful and not necessarily in the committees, Graduate Deans, etc., at each campus.

Lunch break: 12:06 PM – 1:07 PM

(6) Updates on postdoctoral affairs by campus representatives:

(i) UC Davis (Tom Peavy): During last year the Postdoctoral Scholars Association (PSA) at UC Davis developed a list of recommendations that was submitted to Graduate Council last February. The Council provided a point-by-point response that basically accepts all of our recommendations . The Academic Senate reviewed the recommendations and got input from faculty. The new policies include a mandatory offer letter, minimum of 31K (step I of PGR series), full benefits (except for externally-funded fellows – but a package from Garnett-Powers & Associates with competitive rates will be available). Graduate Council approved the recommendations earlier this month and a new UCD APM will be issued. Implementation will take place July 1, 2003. Other issues at Davis now are career services and staff support at Graduate Studies to deal with postdoctoral affairs. Graduate Studies has provided the PSA with $3,000/year. Carol Thornber is now the new Chair of the PSA.

(ii) UC Los Angeles (Lisa Rogers): UCLA does not have a PSA, but does have a dedicated postdoc coordinator at Graduate Studies whose job is to support postdocs. Postdoc resources are limited. The career center welcome postdocs but it is not tailored to postdoc issues. The formation of a PSA will be considered.

(iii) UC Riverside (Azizul Haque): Azizul, Xiangyang Zhou and Cristina Cvitanich are trying to form a postdoctoral association. The response to open meetings was poor (about 20 people of an estimated 260 postdocs). They are trying to create an official web site and have already set up an e-mail listserv, with about 150 subscribers. They are also communicating with postdocs through campus mail. The discussion of the CPS recommendations by the postdocs on campus was very positive. However, the 5-year limit had a negative response, as the university should provide and facilitate alternative middle-level or transition positions. With the help of UC Riverside Graduate Council, Xiangyang did a survey of postdocs at UC Riverside to try to understand their needs in research, salaries, benefits, and the importance of a postdoctoral association at UC Riverside. Of the 40 responses, 90% favor the formation of a PSA, and 9 people have been postdocs for more than 5 years. They will organize a workshop on grant writing this month and they expect to assemble a postdoctoral association and elect representatives in the near future.

(iv) Stanford University - Adjunct Member (Megan Houseweart): In February, the Stanford University Postdoc Association (SUPD) organized a campuswide Town Hall Meeting. About 300 people attended (postdocs and administrators, including the Provost). A new survey was passed out and is being tabulated (n=220). The postdoc Advocacy Committee has successfully submitted several proposals, including maternity policies, housing for postdocs on campus, housing subsidies for postdocs (2 million awarded, partially need based). Good progress has been made on a postdoc childcare center. Another effort is to secure a person on the Career Center specific for postdoc issues. They also want the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs to keep a list of all postdocs to disseminate important notices.

(v) UC San Francisco (Richard Price): About 3 years ago, the primary goal of the PSA was to establish a seminar series (Practice of Science Series) to bring people involved in careers in science (academic, industry, alternative). Now funding has been secured for the next three years from the basic science departments to support career development for postdocs (i.e., Practice of Science series, networking and social events). The seminars, about 2-3 times a year, are well attended (100-200 people) and include topics such as negotiation skills, alternative careers, etc. The PSA has had a representative at Graduate Council for many years. A list of recommendations was developed and approved by Graduate Council. Now the focus has been on local issues (such as mentoring guidelines). Richard mentioned that mentoring recommendations should include evaluations of advisors.

(vi) UC Santa Cruz (Jennifer Armstrong): Two years ago a survey was passed out to try to find out how many postdocs there are on campus. We estimate that there are 50-60 postdocs at UC Santa Cruz (mostly in the Biology Department), but other sources say there may be as many as 200 postdocs on campus. The core group of postdocs at the Biology Department recently contacted the Chemistry Department, and now there is an e-mail list for both departments. The Assistant Dean for Graduate Studies, Sandra Pacheco, spends one fifth of her time working on postdoctoral affairs. Dean Pacheco will attend an official meeting this month with postdocs. There is a plan to have a postdoc link on the Biology Department home page. The postdoc group has been able to invite speakers for seminars. Technically, postdocs are eligible for faculty housing, but are low in the priority list. Postdocs on fellowships still do not have access to any type of health insurance. The major concerns now are that the postdoc organization is unofficial and that the original eight or so members who initiated the organization are now moving on. Jennifer will look into registering the organization as a campus interest group or organization and getting people involved so that there is continuity to the group. Jennifer is having some difficulty in having the organization recognized on campus. Tom suggested sending a letter directly to the Chancellor.

(vii) UC Irvine (Grace Stutzmann): UCI currently has two postdoc coordinators, but typically postdocs are not necessarily aware of this resource. The coordinators are supportive of the recommendations of the CPS and administration, and are working actively to implement them. Grace sent out a letter (through the postdoc coordinator office) looking for feedback from postdocs on campus regarding CPS issues. The response was overwhelmingly positive. Lots of people complained about grievance policies and housing. We now have a postdoc listserv so we can communicate with postdocs on campus.

(viii) UC Berkeley (Amber Budden): The Vice Chancellor for Research is responsible for postdoctoral affairs. Berkeley does have a Visiting Scholar and Postdoc Affairs coordinator. The administration has now posted a “Postdoc Handbook” on their web site, together with postdoc affairs information (title codes, what to expect, etc.). The Berkeley Postdoctoral Association (BPA) would like to add information and links about the BPA on the administration web site. The BPA now has a core of 4 people. The administration used to give $10,000/year (now $8,000) for career advancement: workshops, seminar series, etc. One major issue is communicating and reaching postdocs. The administration has a mailing list (not an e-mail list) of all postdocs. The current BPA listserv (voluntary subscription) has turned into a “for rent/for sale” e-mail list. Subscribers are now required to add a subject line “for sale/rent” when submitting e-mails. Tom suggested to send e-mails to MSOs (Management Services Officers) at each department (can get it done through the administration) and ask for a list of postdocs.

(7) Minutes from previous CPS meeting (02/09/2002) approved.

(8) Discuss the value of a National Postdoc Association. A draft of a proposal for the formation of a National Postdoctoral Association (NPA), prepared by an ad hoc steering committee of 5 postdocs from different institutions (including Stanford University), was circulated. The committee wants to have a staff person located at the Science’s Next Wave office. The staff person would be initially paid from seed money, but the long-term source of money has to be determined (e.g., subscriptions from postdoc associations or institutions). The CPS would support such an organization, depending on the goals and priorities of the NPA. Further involvement will depend on someone from CPS taking responsibility for interacting with this association.

(9) Decide on future plans.

(i) Follow-up the new postdoctoral title code process of drafting the APM, review, and approval.

(ii) Strengthen the systemwide and campuswide postdoc community (communication is the key). Keep local associations active to make sure there is continuity.

(iii) Certification of the Postdoc experience.

(iv) CPS representation at the CoGD and CCGA meetings (with rotating CPS council members).

(v) Career fair that is web-based (systemwide).

(vi) Write letters to non-complying funding agencies to advocate new policies for fellows regarding salaries and benefits.

(vii) Continue to compile data from existing surveys from all campuses. Post results on the CPS web site and have a mechanism to update it as new survey results are available.

(viii) Look for sources of funding for PSAs, the CPS, postdoc coordinators, and postdoc programs (e.g., career services). Would some of the indirect costs (overhead) from grant funds be available for postdocs? For example, overhead is charged for postdoc salaries. Is any of it used to our benefit? The CPS representatives will try to find out where overhead money goes (ask Provosts, Offices of Research, NIH, etc.).

(ix) University should provide and facilitate alternative middle-level or transition positions for postdocs.

(10) Discuss organizational bylaws. The CPS is now an officially recognized organization. Now is the time to formalize our organizational bylaws (e.g., mission, election of chair and officers, one postdoc representative with voting privileges per campus, etc.). The draft previously provided by Tom (via e-mail) was amended and approved unanimously.

(11) The next UC Systemwide meeting of the CPS will be sponsored by one of the Southern California UC campuses during Fall Quarter, 2002. The specific date, time and location will be announced by e-mail.

(12) Tom thanked the UC San Francisco campus, and in particular Richard Price, for organizing and hosting the CPS meeting.

Meeting adjourned at 4:06 PM by Tom Peavy (CPS Chair).

Prepared by Paulo Verardi, UC Davis Postdoctoral Scholars Association Secretary/Treasurer.

2003-02-22, UC Santa Cruz, Photo

From left to right,
Back Row: Clarence Lee, Shawn Hayes, Raymond Clark, Elieen Anderson-Fye, Tom Peavy, Rich Price
Front Row: Amber Budden, Korsi Dumenyo, Kristina Hufford, Florian Ausfelder

2004-03-13, UC Santa Barbara, Photo

From left to right:
(please edit if you know)

2004-04-16, NPA Annual Meeting, Washington DC, Photo

2004-11-13, UC Davis, Photo

2005-02-05, UC Irvine, Photo

2005-09-17, UC San Francisco, Photo

Standing from left to right are: Jon Soderholm, Christiane Chen, Zoran Djurisic, Christina Lewis, Jerry Breslin, Michelle Juarez, Shawn Hayes, Graham Davies. Kneeling from left to right are Chad Haynes and Anrea Salinas.

2006-01-28, Scripps, Minutes

UC Council of Postdoctoral Scholars
Meeting Minutes from January 28, 2006 (Approved June 10, 2006)
Meeting at Scripps Research Institute, San Diego, CA

Members Present:
UCB – Jon Soderholm
UCD – Jerry Breslin (Chair)
UCI – Jason Poole and Jaan Mannik
UCSD – Michelle Juarez
UCSF – Christina Lewis, Rachel Wain
Consulting Members Present:
Cal Tech – Chad Haynes
Scripps – Adam Mullick (Host)
Stanford – Chrstiane Chen
Advisors/UC Personnel Present:
CPS Advisor – Shawn Hayes
UCOP – Mark Westlye
Guests:
Scripps: Jan Hill, Ryan Wheeler

Jerry Breslin called the meeting to order at 10:00 am. He and Adam Mullick offered a welcome and opening comments.

Mark Westlye gave an update from UCOP. There is uncertainty about the status of the CPS. What kind of organization is it? What do postdocs want it to be? There was discussion about the possibility of a budget, office space issues, administrative support, representatives on campus committees, etc.

Christina Lewis motioned a task force be created to solve the continuing problems with recognition of postdocs. There was discussion that the CPS needs to identify what postdocs need and at what particular campuses. Also, some UC campuses have no postdoc representation on committees or on the CPS. An email exchange of how postdocs achieved certain goals on different campuses was suggested. The motion was tabled and the discussion moved to the invitation of industry postdocs to a CPS meeting.

After a short discussion, it was agreed that postdocs from Genentech would be invited to an informal social with CPS members at the next CPS meeting in Berkeley.

CPS business:
Jon Soderholm presented an informational document regarding compensation of postdocs. It was suggested that the CPS present data showing that other universities and research institutions in California are offering more competitive salaries than UC.

The Mentoring Checklist was tabled until the next meeting.

A new logo for CPS was presented and feedback provided. (Subsequently a logo was chosen in web discussion and placed on the website)

Website: Jerry Breslin announced that Graham Davies (UCLA) had moved the website from UCD to the UCLA postdoc server. They are working on improving the content and design.

Campus Report Highlights:
CalTech: Budget has increased, but PDO funding was cut. Chad Haynes presented copies of the CPA 2005 annual report, which they send to the Provost, Vice-Provost, President, all Division Chairs and Director of Human Resources annually.

UCSD: Currently does not have a PSA, but does have a PDO. Michelle Juarez and some other postdocs and the GSA are trying to organize a career symposium in San Diego for Oct. 14 or Oct. 21. It was proposed that the next CPS meeting occur at UCSD in this time frame.

UCSF: Christina Lewis reported the PSA awarded its first Outstanding Faculty Mentorship Award. Over 100 nomination letters for 32 different faculty were received. The PSA also appointed two new faculty advisors. They wil be conducting an outreach program to East Bay postdocs. Recently they had a successful ski trip, and a sailing trip is coming up.

UCI: Jason Poole and Jaan Mannik reported that there is no official PSA, but they have a biomedical trainee network (15-20 people normally attend). There is an NSF grant pending for postdoc (women and minority) career advancement program that ties in with UCR and UCLA. Currently there is no graduate dean (search in progress) and the career center is not currently providing services for postdocs.

Scripps: Adam Mullick presented the annual report for the Scripps (TSRI) Society of Fellows (SOF). There are 809 postdocs at TSRI. Events include a distinguished lecturer series and a lot of social events that sell-out quickly.

UCB: Jon Soderholm reported the BPA has some new members (4 on the executive board), and that about 15 members actively participate in the PSA. About 50 postdocs attended a recent holiday party. They have monthly meetings and are planning a weekly happy hour. The BPA is looking into collaborations with the LBL postdoc association, and will meet with the Vice Chancellor of Research to discuss goals and start a dialogue. Jon also described the VSPA workshop series and some teaching opportunities for postdocs.

UCD: Jerry Breslin described the PSA’s postdoc teaching initiative. The PSA is currently reconstructing its website, which was very outdated. A change in the funding cycle for UCD postdoc travel grants has been implemented in order to try to get more applications and make the process easier for postdocs.

Stanford: Christiane Chen announced Standford postdocs now have vision insurance with no out-of-pocket premium. Status is now officially postdoc instead of graduate student. There were complaints that employees were given a holiday bonus and that postdocs were left out, but this was later resolved. SUPD now has a budget.

Next meeting:
The proposed date for the next meeting was May 6. June 3 was proposed as a backup date. The meeting will be at UC Berkeley.

The meeting concluded at 4:30 pm.

2006-06-10, UC Berkeley, Minutes (Placeholder)

(Enter data here)

2006-11-04, UC San Diego, Minutes

University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars Meeting
November 4, 2006, UC San Diego

ATTENDEES:
UCSD PSA: Michelle Juarez, Amanda, Yvonne, Sam
UC Berkeley: John Soderholm, Zoran Djurisic, Marianne Poxleitner
UCLA: Graham Davies
UC Davis: Gustavo Barisone
UCOP: Mark Westlye
UCSD OPS: Art ?last name?, Jennifer Oh, Merritt Bradford
Salk: Xiangmin Xu
Stanford: Lucia Mokres
ScienceRing: Audrey ?last name?
Scripps: Adam Mullick, Justin ?last name? (briefly – intro himself as new pres)
Garnett-Powers: Steve Johnson

Abbreviations: PDA = postdoctoral association; PDO = postdoctoral office

After the introductions, Art described the Office of Research Affairs office at UCSD. There are nontraditional opportunities around that the UCSD OPS is trying to publicize, for example, with the BIOCOM symposium in October (Jennifer will talk about) and through discovery core fellowships.

Mark Westlye, from the UC Office of the President (academic advancement dept in academic affairs), discussed a few developments he was involved in the past – UC set up a telephone communication system 4-5 years ago to talk about issues arising regarding postdoc affairs. This resulted in APM-390. Since then, they’ve been working very hard on postdoc benefits. Represents an effort from a group of ~150 people – a big project.

He also mentioned there are currently efforts to standardize pay to national standards (NIH, NSF, etc).

Steve Johnson, from Garnett Powers and Assoc., reported that their relationship with UC system and postdocs is entering into its 3rd year now. There are new rates though, so make sure all department heads and HR know about these new numbers. A big change for international postdocs is that they no longer have to buy extra insurance, except for dependents.

He also reminded that after 6 monthsw, short term disability is gone. But, some people had to sign up for long-term disability when first joined university. There was no open enrollment for that later. However, now you can do it at open enrollment too. This may be important for people who put in the wrong amounts on the calculations form online and opted out because of the misleading large number. It can be added now for $6.66 per month.

UCSF was the last UC campus to join, and now all 10 campuses are taking advantage of these benefits. UCI has some problems with their campus medical group not accepting Healthnet, and so they’re going with PacificNet instead.

If we hear anything else that postdocs need, Garret Powers & Assoc. is happy to listen to suggestions.

Imputed income and consequences discussed. Imputed income means that a postdoc who is a fellow or paid-direct and has all or part of their benefits paid for them will have to pay taxes on those benefits. Benefits are taxable income because for nonemployees, they are considered fringe. For foreign postdocs, UC withholds it. If have questions, go to payroll.

Somebody asked about Legal services status. In the past, other people have requested it, so Garnett and Powers researched it. They could provide a voluntary plan where you get reduced rates for services, but it was not very popular. It would not cover anything against employers, only stuff outside of work like divorce, car issues, etc. Will not cover immigration issues, ever, either. If people are still interested in legal services, then a survey of interest must be performed.

Rollout atyourservice in March. There are still some problems though because need a SS#, and not everyone has one. Still have some kinks to work out.

Raymond Clark, who has been involved with the CPS and NPA, went to a National Academy of Sciences field meeting to discuss how to get scientists involved in communicating with government. The government thinks there is a shortage of qualified job seekers in science and technology. Raymond suggested to them that policy for foreign scientists be changed. He also had other suggestions (see his presentation).

Hill Days and AAAS internships were also discussed.

Jennifer Oh, director of the UCSD Postdoc Office (she also introduced Merritt) is trying to develop a curriculum for postdoc training – provide exposure to lots of things. She talked about the BIOCOM symposium, which was a huge success, well-attended, with a lot of good discussion and information. It was done in coordination with Scripps, Burnham, Salk, etc.

The UCSD PDO will offer lab management training in the spring. Limited space. See flyer. There is also an idea of starting a biotech company internship program for postdocs.

AUDREY:
From ScienceRing.

Started the website 3 months ago, near peak of unionization issues.

Can personalize your own page to narrow information down to what you’re looking for.

Everything right now is out of pocket of the founders. Audrey has a webmaster friend to do the web stuff for free.

Others on the council were supportive of the site, but gave suggestions, etc.

LUNCH

JOHN
Vice president of PSA at UC Berkeley

Discussed call/need for faculty advisor (person’s job is to give advice from a faculty perspective). John provided a name (see handout) as a suggestion. Sam (UCSD) asked that the call be open instead of based on council suggestions. Council discussed how this might be possible. Go from Top-Down was suggested so that the faculty will pay attention to the call more readily. Mark says if you go to an administrator, you cross jurisdiction because of shared governance, so starts getting complicated. Other way to do it is through ad hoc invitations. Then don’t have to go through channels. Discussed option of having a rep on each campus, and then whoever was available at next CPS meeting, go.

John will provide a sample letter to ask faculty for involvement. Decided to have all nominations solidified by January 15.

Outreach – John volunteered at last CPS to try to get other UC campuses who are not represented on the council to participate. He is continuing working on it.

Marianne Poxleitner, President of PSA at UC Berkeley, discussed the upcoming NPA meeting. She needs people to help with the whole event (over 3 days). She believes that some sort of aid could be provided to those that help the whole time (not sure what kind of aid or how much aid – maybe a hotel room or something). They’re planning to have PDA, PDO, and JOINT sessions. JOINT session meant to try to bring together both sides and look at common goals.

She also talked about interest in having UC intercampus newsletters, to increase communication between UC campuses, postdocs, offices, etc. Maybe use website (Graham was volunteered) through an RSS feed as newsletter and post things there.
In addition, she mentioned the recent postdoctoral scholar retreat, at which there was poor attendance by postdocs. This was a missed opportunity to communicate with the UC administration about needs.

CAMPUS REPORTS
To summarize, the main topics were fundraising, communication on each campus (how to communicate via email, newsgroups, etc). The biggest problem on all campuses seems to be postdoc interest, i.e. poor turnout at many events. Scripps is an exception as they usually good participation and good attendance.

NEXT MTG
Try for 6 mo from today, possibly AFTER the NPA meeting at UCLA or UC Davis.

2007-04-01, UC Berkeley, Minutes

University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars Meeting
April 1, 2007, Berkeley, CA

Attendance:

UC Postdocs/Council Members: Jon Soderholm, UCB, Selva Sukumar, UCB, Jerry Breslin, UCD, Ajay Gopal, UCLA, Sarah Warburton, UCLA, Jason Triplett, UCSC, Michele Juarez, UCSD

Consultants: Chris Gandhi, CalTech, Lucia Mokres, Stanford, Dan Cao, Stanford, Sam Casteneda, UCB, Tom Garnett, Garnett and Powers, Alberto Roca, UCI

This meeting was held after the conclusion of the National Postdoctoral Association meeting at UC Berkeley.

After the introductions, Tom Garnett gave an update about benefits for postdocs, providing statistics of participation at UC campuses. Tom also remarked that more campuses around the nation are signing up for special benefit packages tailored for postdocs. As of January 2007 J-1 and J-2 visa holders are provided with medical evacuation and repatriation insurance to comply with federal guidelines. He also reminded us that all postdocs automatically are enrolled in life insurance ($50K) and accidental death insurance ($100K) polices.

Discussions about future directions of the CPS:
There was a discussion about improving dialogue between the CPS and UCOP, and that UCOP has requested more frequent discussions about postdoc matters. There was some discussion regarding how campus PDAs interact with their campus administration. For example, Stanford, which has 1500 postdocs, has 8 staff members working for their PDO and PDA to coordinate postdoc affairs. Most UC campuses do not have this kind of structure.

JS brought up issue of Sam acting as a staff person for the CPS. CG supported the idea, noting that permanence of staff person is important. The issues of space, staff people, etc. and funding for PDAs were further discussed, as well as whether GSAs and PDAs interact on the different campuses.

Campus Reports

UCI has no formal postdoctoral association. Jason and Jaan couldn’t make it to the NPA/CPS meeting. UCI has a new Dean of the Graduate School, Research Division. There is a new emeritus professor grant program ($25000/year). Barbara Hamkalo at UCI has received one and is in the NPA mentoring program. She will be addressing postdoc issues and will try to start setting up a PDO. UCI also has a new institutionalized NSF Advance grant program.

UCSC is in the process of starting a new PDA.

UCSD hosted CPS last time – 5 postdocs helped out. MJ is working with Jennifer Oh in getting their PDA revitalized. People are volunteering and she will probably bring an additional person to CPS in the near future.

Stanford: Many of the officers are preparing to move on and they are working on recruiting new people, like Dan, to maintain continuity.

UCB: Marianne has stepped down and there is transition process going on. Recent focus was helping Sam with NPA meeting. The PDA still has a good size core that is fairly active. The last big social was a holiday party. Sam puts on event called “postdoc pizza parlor” which is a sort of town hall meeting.

UCD: Most of the officers will be moving on soon, and efforts have been mainly focused on maintaining structures such as the annual awards for excellence in postdoctoral research and travel grants programs, as well as finding volunteers to become the new leaders of the PDA. The monthly pub night is still a good draw.

CalTech is also in maintenance mode. They lost one staff person in HR who deals with postdocs. They presented their annual survey, including demographic data, asked about postdoc experiences, what kind of programming wanted. The return rate was about 50%. An iPod raffle associated with survey. The tool used was Zoomerang survey – it’s a dynamic survey with special questions for particular groups. Up to 150 questions. The Sigma Xi survey was used as a template. Recent events including the Annual town meeting (state of the postdoc association), Halloween party last fall, monthly beer hour, off-campus theatre trips, and other social activities. Recently there have also been meetings with Provost, career programming, and a meeting with new President on campus. There is still no PDO on campus.

UCLA: The PDA is in a state of transition/reorganization. Graham has departed and some committees were defunct. AG is setting up a salary survey on the website. Goals are to lobby for career center access and a PDO. The PDA will become an advisory group but want to work with a PDO. May raffle iPod shuffle with survey.

Next meeting: Stanford, tentatively for August. Michelle Juarez will chair. Lucia and Dan will host.

2007-04-01, UC Berkeley, Photo

Standing:
Sitting:

2007-10-06, Stanford, Agenda and Campus Reports

For the benefit of those who were not able to make it to the meeting, the Agenda and campus reports from members is attached. The minutes of the meeting will follow as a separate entry.

2007-10-06, Stanford, Meeting Minutes

University of California Council of Postdoctoral Scholars Meeting
October 6, 2007
Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA

Attendance: Michelle Juarez, Chair (UCSD), Alberto Roca (UCI), Kapil Krishan (UCI), Saran Karumbayaram (UCLA), Markus Kaufmann (UCLA), Ajay Gopal (UCLA), Selva Sukumar (UCB), Niranjana Nagarajan (UCB), Joe Cerny, Faculty Advisor (UCB), Sam Casteneda (UCB), Lucia Mokres (Stanford), Alison McGuigan (Stanford), Dan Cao (Stanford), Chequeta Allen (Stanford), Scott Moorefield (UCSF), Christine Des Jarlais (UCSF), Jason Triplett (UCSC), Abhinav Bhusan (UCD), Steve Johnson (Garnett-Powers).

Following introductions, Chequeta Allen, Assistant Dean of Postdoctoral Affairs at Stanford, explained the workings of her office and the successes of postdocs in relation to access to administrative support. Several questions concerning the handling of postdocs relative to UC institutions were addressed, specifically highlighting the difference of postdocs viewed as students rather than employees. Following this discussion, a brief tour of the Office of Postdoctoral Affairs was taken by all.

Steve Johnson of Garnett-Powers gave a brief review of the status of the Postdoctoral Scholars Benefit Plan (PSBP), highlighting that few if any changes have been made. Open enrollment will be occurring in November, and a powerpoint presentation will be sent to UC institutions at which a formal presentation is not made. In addition, Garnett-Powers is currently working on a group retirement savings plan and a legal support plan for postdocs, but the final details have not been worked out.

Christine Des Jarlais gave a brief review of the Office of the President’s current thinking on postdocs, revealing that now is likely a good time to make some inroads. Additionally, Chris mentioned the possibility of the creation of a CPS staff position housed in her office in conjunction with monies form UCOP.

Joe Cerny gave a detailed history of his involvement in the growing recognition of postdoctoral scholars by UCOP, culminating in the passage of APM-390. He also outlined keys to a successful postdoctoral scholars association, e.g. UCCPS, including buy-in from senior administration and faculty, a small bureaucratic staff, and a vibrant postdoc community.

Sam Casteneda reported that the Berkeley campus is sponsoring the annual UC-wide postdoc administrator retreat, although time and place have not been settled.

Following lunch, a lengthy discussion concerning the state of the CPS, where it is going, and who will take it there commenced. A strategic plan was outlined, and several action items (attached below) for the next meeting were identified and staffed. Key items in the strategic plan include: requesting staff support from UCOP, establishing a listserv to enhance communic