Bullying in Academic Space — An unspoken reality.
Hi, I am Krishnendu Chatterjee, a TIGP Nano graduate (Sept 2012 — July 2017). I hope you are doing well. I have been contemplating to highlight the issues faced by some of my friends and peers during and after my time as a Ph.D. student. Now that my Ph.D. is complete, I have no fear in writing this for raising some of the issues that are currently being faced by International students in Sinica.
“Perhaps the most important step is to recognize problems and tell others about them. Exploitation has persisted for so long because it is hidden.”
https://peerscientist.com/…/exploitation-by-supervisors-mu…/
Monetary Issues
Being TIGP students we have the privilege of guaranteed stipend for the first 2 years at least. This time is generally spent on coursework and finding a suitable lab. Most students don’t think or discuss directly with their lab members about the lab funding and so when the TIGP scholarship ends after 2 years, they are completely at the mercy of their supervisors.
(i) The supervisor can sometimes pay really low salary to force the student to change lab or quit.
(ii) The supervisor can force the student with short contracts (2 months to 6 months) to prove their worth in the lab and consistently perform based on which scholarship is renewed. This happens after the TIGP scholarship is expended, so the student has no option to be vocal about this kind of exploitation.
(iii) The students who are given way less salary compared to an RA doesn’t even have the same rights. For example, the contract of RA generally has a termination notice period of 1–2 months but most Ph.D. students don’t have any such clauses. This has given undue power to supervisors who have used it to blackmail students and in few cases have outright stopped paying any salary (Really its worth less than TIGP stipend but since we pay taxes, I prefer to call it salary).
(iv) Sometimes, lab funding might be a problem in continuing Ph.D. thesis on a particular topic and students are given options either to change projects or find alternative labs. This can occur to every student at any given point.
(v) The supervisors now have the power to reduce stipend if they deem the student unfit for their lab during lab rotations! I mean seriously! In 3–6 months a student spend on lab rotation he/she has to adjust to a foreign country, do coursework, assignment and then some basic lab experiments.
What can students do in these cases? I have some suggestions but I would like others especially current TIGP administration and students to think over these issues and come up with concrete steps to safeguard the student’s interests as well.
(i) The student should know that they can stop their stipend after 1st year and can renew it again later. SO, for example, if a student joins a lab he/she can choose to stop the TIGP funding and can ask their supervisor to pay. I strongly suggest student save 6 months to 1-year TIGP stipend but it can totally depend on the student-supervisor relationship.
(ii) Ideally, the students should have proved his mettle before the TIGP scholarship ends. I am not against short contracts but if the contract renewal is based on regular performance (read result output) the supervisor should test the student while they still have TIGP scholarships and not after they have utilized it.
(iii) The TIGP office should educate the students of their rights. When we are paid a salary and pay taxes we should have some protection against sudden termination of contracts. Most contracts do not have a notice period, I repeat NO NOTICE PERIOD. This is absurd and unacceptable. The contracts must have 1–2 months notice period so that in case a student is forced to quit a particular lab he/ she can still look for another lab. Being international students we don’t have the luxury to find a lab while remaining unpaid. I would like the TIGP committee to think about the legal aspects and enforce it or even have custom made contracts for PI approval forms.
(iv) One cannot do anything if lab funding forces the closure of one’s Ph.D. project. But having prior information on lab funding would definitely help students. Don’t be shy in discussing lab funding and related information with your boss. Most of you would someday lead a lab so be forthright without being too intrusive. This could help you in choosing the right projects and right labs.
(v) 3–6 months, is too less a time to judge a student and at least he/she should get 1 year or the reduction in stipend should be done if 2 or more of the supervisors under which lab rotation has been done agree to slash TIGP scholarship.
I have other issues related to unethical blackmailing and intimidation cases but for now, I would not like to raise them as that would dilute the important problems here. I have highlighted some of the real cases/ scenarios and I would like the TIGP GSA committee to think over it. I am willing to present my point in person as well. I think students should be made more aware of their rights. It’s been a long post but a necessary one as no one seems to focus or speak out fearing repercussions. Luckily, I am not in Academia anymore! (Thank God for that!)
NOTE: Not all supervisors or students are same, so kindly refrain from giving a personal reference (and for obvious reasons too!).
