Due to some rather unnecessary rambling about PPP, etc., I failed miserably in getting my point across. So, what the hell was my point?
Most of our elite institutions (EIs) are publicly funded, a fact that constrains them from unilaterally deciding to increase faculty salaries (however desirable this course of action might be). What are these constraints? One is that faculty positions are essentially for life; dismissals for non-performance are rare. The second is pay parity with people in (regular) government service; bureaucrats will rebel at -- and derail -- attempts to disturb this carefully crafted 'equilibrium'. Finally, government just doesn't do differential pay structure (e.g., high fliers getting paid more, within the same scale).
Moreover, there's not much point in asking for an across-the-board salary increase. Why? Simply because there is a lot of non-performers in our system, and such a pay-raise would end up benefitting those as well.
Thus, under these circumstances, what we should aim for -- demand! -- is a situation where high performers are able to earn more through non-salary mechanisms. Consultancy is one such route, but it's not aligned 100 % with the goals of an academic institution.
Allowing faculty to earn money from their research grants would be far more preferable. It already happens in research grants from industry; I would like it to happen in grants from government agencies as well.
7 Comments:
Abi:
Why this topic at this time? In any case the 6th Pay
Commission is being set up and they will look into
the grouses you list. I remember a qualitative shift
in our own remuneration at the time the 5th Pay
Commission report was implemented. If EI faculty
want higher salaries, then so will Army Officers who
are 'defending the country', IAS chaps who are
'running the country', and the list is endless. I think
EI faculty, like the others listed above are public
servants first and foremost, in a rather poor country,
and this should be kept in mind. Salary and money
is not the be all and end all of everything; how about
the freedom that EI faculty enjoy, to choose and work
on whatever they please, or not at all? I seriously
doubt that monetary incentives will improve the quality
of research, some some of the commenters on your
previous post have suggested.
Abi:
Why this topic at this time? In any case the 6th Pay
Commission is being set up and they will look into
the grouses you list. I remember a qualitative shift
in our own remuneration at the time the 5th Pay
Commission report was implemented. If EI faculty
want higher salaries, then so will Army Officers who
are 'defending the country', IAS chaps who are
'running the country', and the list is endless. I think
EI faculty, like the others listed above are public
servants first and foremost, in a rather poor country,
and this should be kept in mind. Salary and money
is not the be all and end all of everything; how about
the freedom that EI faculty enjoy, to choose and work
on whatever they please, or not at all? I seriously
doubt that monetary incentives will improve the quality
of research, some some of the commenters on your
previous post have suggested.
Why doesnt anyone talk about research for research's sake ? Isnt that what a PhD was all about in the first place ? Did anyone of you write in your SOPs that you want to make money by doing a PhD ?
Just one more priceless thought for the day
which addresses all your points, to one extent
or another.
The system of prizes and awards does just
what you would like. It gives extra remuneration
to those amongst us who are considered
extraordinary (Swarnajayanthi fellowship),
and gives large cash prizes (Bhatnagar).
These are not given to 'non-performers'
since they are not worthy of such distinction.
So your fears are not that well-founded, methinks!
anonymous:
i think that's pretty much what falstaff and i both talked about in our responses to abi's previous post. (note that this particular one is titled "faculty salaries").
Anant: Thanks for your comments. While it is possible that monetary incentives may not matter much, we would never know until we try it. My post is about better ways of trying 'it'.
While awards have cash components, (a) they arrive *after* the faculty member achieves something and (b) they are few. (a) means it arrives too late, and (b) means not every achiever gets the monetary reward.
Anon: Hey, we are all for research for research's sake. If we can make some money, it's all the better!
Seriously, it's a question of what our EIs should be doing to make academic careers more attractive. Right now, these careers are not attractive to a large number of people, who choose to stay away from them (by going into other fields, going abroad, or both).
TR: Thanks for your comment, again.
I just want to know the following:
Has the sixth pay commission recommendation implemented for Faculty in EIs?? or are still they *thinking* about it.
I do agree that good students, freedom of research, consultancy etc are important for an young faculty and is probably available in EIs. However, one cannot overlook the importance of salary (since there is no guarantee that one can generate sufficient money thro' consultancy). I know how the environment inside an IIT or IISc is, as I had my Ph.D from an EI. Nevertheless, I still remember the struggle that I faced to buy two air tickets (for me and my wife) to travel abroad for my post-doc. Ultimately, bank balance do matter.
Post a Comment