to be biting my tongue and think they are being twits about jobs/unpaid experience?

[LRDtheFeministDragon]

I am this close to snapping back about this so just want to see if I am BU or if you can tell me to be a nicer person.

A few days ago I was asked to publicize a competition which has been set up to give people an unpaid position, while they're looking for the paid equivalent. They'd also get space to work and access to various subscription-only stuff you'd need. Jobs are very competitive so there are lots of people who will be in the position of not having found one yet, so the fact this is competitive too, means it would be better on your CV than a blank.

Obviously I know it won't be for everyone. It isn't anything to do with me as an initiative - I was literally just asked to spread the word. So I did. People now keep responding and asking what it's for, saying they don't see why it's made competitive 'as they could just give it to everyone' and saying it's pointless as it doesn't pay anything. I replied a couple of times saying why I thought it was being offered and I'm now giving up.

Am I being unreasonable to think they are being idiots? Here they are, they haven't managed to get jobs, but they're turning their noses up at this and seem to have no understanding why there might be competition for it. I made it clear I am just passing on information and am still getting these stupid snooty comments about how they wouldn't choose to do this, etc. etc.

I am so tempted to reply pointing out that beggars can't be choosers. AIBU?

Just from my lot - there is tesco/call centre, though I don't know anyone atm who has those. Tutoring is very, very common, though. Or doing things like proof reading.

It's the same jobs we've done throughout the PhD, usually, just more hours if you can. I am not looking forward to it, I've got to say.

No! Technically it was done in a PI's lab therefore the PI has to be included on it and there's no way that will fly.

I tried. I oopsied. I have been fortunate though to have worked with some truly great people and taken great satisfaction out of what I have done and achieved and also helped others achieved. I am in a tight corner and I cannot say much more as my situation is fairly unique. You'd recognise me if you knew my history and what led to where I am.

Science is a great career and research is one hell of an adventure. It's addictive. And no, I haven't quite gotten it out of my system. Good luck!

Heya LRD,

I think this is really a problem of framing. They should be calling it something like a Visiting Fellowship (unpaid). Here in France, a number of academic institutions offer this -- they don't pay you but you have desk space, the affiliation, you can participate in department activities. They present it less as a competition to get one, rather you simply write to them, explain your research, and if they think it fits in with their activities and they have space, poof, you're a fellow.

I do understand why people react a bit badly to this (although they shouldn't bother you about it!) The idea that even after years of schooling, achieving the highest possible degree in your field, doing all the associated things you do to become an expert, you still then have to compete for an unpaid position just so you have a line on your CV -- it's a bit mad isn't it? I mean, it's the kind of advice we give to BA graduates or MA students.

I agree with you there are advantages to it, but I actually think they should try to make it sound a bit more casual, instead of bigging up something that isn't really all that impressive in the end.

Journals are more likely to be electronic versions (i.e. available online) these days though. I haven't been into an actual physical library in a long while, but having access to the journals via Athens/Shibboleth is very valuable - research would cost me a fortune without this. Though I believe our university library is open well into the evening and at weekends (and around the clock at exam time, though that's more for the benefit of undergrads).

I agree there's a limited amount of research (or anything really) you can do alongside a full-time job. That's the problem though. If no one will pay you to do research (yet), your options are limited, and I guess having some access to resources is better than nothing...

Hi dreaming.

Yes, that might have been a much better title for it, absolutely. I have a horrible feeling they didn't think hard, just dashed to email it out, because they have already put out one 'correction' explaining a minor detail. They clearly thought people would jump at it and, so far as I can see, no-one is jumping.

ephiny - yes, that's what I meant, sorry - that you need journal subscription even if not the physical access in the building. Personally, if I'd not been able to borrow books I would have found my work very hard to do - it's amazing what a privilege that feels like (and is).

Btw I'm doing academic editing to pay the bills while I wait for my viva. The pay is atrocious but at least I can do it in my PJs and it's good training for writing my own journal articles. They seem to have a lot of literature articles submitted so you may want to give it a try!

I don't know how you people cope with MLA style btw

Ahh, the viva!

How exciting to be waiting for it though.

I should really get on and do some real work ... the irony of posting on this thread when I should be writing is beginning to shame me away from the computer ...

MLA - oh, god, yes. It annoys me too.

In my PhD area, there were quite a lot of materials that could only be accessed during open hours. Though more and more is being digitised. Still, it's the time element - I personally found it impossible to do the unpaid work necessary to keep 'in the game' on top of a full-time job.

I have seen the way academia (at least in arts & humanities) has gone and I am very glad to be out of it, tbh.

This situation reminds me a bit of an advert I once saw by the BBC. It was a poster asking for the public to conduct interviews among members of their local community about local history. It stipulated the number of interviews necessary (say, 5) and recording time. It may also have asked the material to be edited - at least formatted in a certain way. The prize for the winner who successfully completed all those hours of work and was deemed the best of all the entries??? Wait for it: The opportunity to have your work aired on BBC AND a tour of the BBC building!!

Basically: exploiting people who are desperate for any opportunity to get experience. And getting work done for free. It's rife in the media, and it's now the case in academia too.

Mama, that's a good example.

I also find this to be a worrying trend inside something that should be a good trend, namely open-access publishing.

I have seen two journals in my field recently who very proudly put themselves forward as supplying top-class research that anyone can access.... yet, they are advertising for PhD and postdocs to do their editing work unpaid.

It is just going to get worse and worse as the recession and lower funding keep decreasing the number of paying jobs while more and more people graduate every year. So LRD you may be getting flack because people are just encountering this stuff everywhere. Your post may be the tenth time that day they saw something that sounded great only to find it unpaid.

I think open access publishing is very tricky. Obviously it's great in theory. But my national body, which does enormous amounts to fund disadvantaged students, gives money to attend conferences, and does loads of outreach work in schools, is entirely funded by its journal. We are expecting a disaster in the next few years :(

My last paper had 22 authors incidentally :) but I like to include everyone who helped a little bit!

I agree with you, LRD.

Journalism is increasingly also dominated by unpaid internships. Especially online publications.

Everything is dominated by unpaid internships these days, it seems.

And this idea that you have to just suck up unpaid work, that that's the way to get ahead, is a bit dangerous I think. Certainly some of the most successful people I know are people who did not do unpaid work, they valued their time and skills too highly for that.

I think a certain amount of unpaid work is okay but it's a slippery slope isn't it? It's really becoming standard.

The media's been like that for a long time, sadly. I've not seen the figures but I would suspect it's as much dominated by privilege as parliament. Anything to do with writing, there's always someone willing to do it for free.

Look here all you haterz, how are the untalented children of the rich supposed to have the highly paid and interesting careers that are their due if they have to compete with the plebs?

This is how meritocracy works - the successful insulate their children from having to work as hard as they did.

Quite right. Guardian columns for all who can afford it!

Seriously though I think LRD is right that privilege is a slightly separate problem. However much funding there was for post-doc work, there'd still be people getting the same experience without having to go through the angsty trial of applying for it. Even if absolutely everybody who wanted to could go on to post-doc research and be able to comfortably pay for food, bus pass and a roof over their head, you'd still get the wealthier ones going off on research trips to Florence and that.

Money always adds an extra layer to some people's experiences, sadly, regardless of how good or bad the standard offering is.

I agree with the poster upthread who said the meritocracy is over and we're going back to Edwardian times again. Oxbridge (and now the Russell Group unis) full of toffs who can in the first place afford the tuition fees, and who then walk straight into certain professions. This time round it'll be because daddy can afford to fund them while they work unpaid for however long it takes.

It is sickening.

I would say about 80% of the people I know who got fully funded for postgrad work were people who didn't really need the funding. It's a self-reinforcing cycle, because of course then they are also the people most likely to get jobs afterward (many academic jobs, at least in my field, want people who have already attracted funding).

It has real practical consequences in my field, I think, because then these are the people going around explaining how we should interact with the poorest and most disadvantaged people in the world.

AThing, I sincerely doubt the 'untalented children of the rich' are going to benefit from what is, essentially, free access to the library, a workspace and a line on the CV. They will not need the first two, and sadly, in all likelihood if any relatively untalented person gets through the PhD, they'll have cracked how to do it without needing time out before their first academic job. The odds of getting a job straight out (or of simply not needing to worry about one) are already stacked in their favour.

OTOH this idea does provide for someone who isn't well off, and who can't easily afford the library fee, and more importantly, who is in the situation of needing to fill a blank in their CV because - unlike the rich kids - they've worked through the PhD and continue to do so.

I agree Mama

Oops, sorry, I must have forgotten to refresh and cross-posted quite a lot in my last.

I agree mama. And it worries me, too. I do think it goes together with the attitude that, nowadays, you 'pay' for your undergraduate degree and you expect to get what you paid for.

TBH I think this is perhaps partly what I'm taking agin with these people I'm talking to about this, in that they clearly feel they've done the PhD and by god, that should be enough. They're not acknowledging that just doing the time - getting, if you like, the equivalent of an 'honours degree' - doesn't mean you're going to snap up a job. Any more than my undergraduates who say 'but I kept to the mark scheme for a pass' are going suddenly to find they're awarded first class marks.

Well as someone whose paid job is now being done by unpaid interns under the watchful eye of one very stressed experienced person, I think unpaid internships are pretty indefensible.

I can see that that must be rotten. And I agree on that count, about.

But, this isn't that situation.

Sorry, I don't know if I'm banging on and we've just moved on in the debate, or if it's still not clear (and I am really sorry my OP was so stupidly unclear).

I loathe internships. Especially those people who have spent about 2 years doing one after another. All it says to me is Rich Mummy and Daddy Are Funding Me. I would much rather employ someone who has worked at Maccy D's or wiping arses in an old people's home. That says to me that they're not afraid of hard work, not that they enjoy poncing around at their parents' expense into their late 20s.

I actually interviewed someone, and asked them why they chose their last internship. He said "I didn't choose it, Daddy found it for me because his friend owns the company."