“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.