Salary of a Lecturer

Godge · 24-07-2010 01:00AM

Fremen wrote: »

It seems like a large fraction of the people criticising lecturers here have experiance of undergraduate life, and little beyond that. Believe it or not, at least in the sciences, you only really find out what these guys *actually* do once you reach graduate school. Even an MSc might not give you a full appreciation, unless there's a major research component.

Find me a PhD student who thinks lecturers are lazy or underworked and I'll be very impressed. Unlike secondary level teachers, lecturers' careers are made through research and pulling in funding. People probably perceive them as being lazy because they only saw the teaching side of the lecturer's job, which is not always a priority.

Edit:

That's really not how it works. It would be nice if there was a teaching/research divide, but in practice there just isn't. Apart from some exceptional cases, you're either both or neither.

This post gives the impression that lecturers careers depend on research and pulling in funding. I do not believe this is the case but I am willing to accept it for the sake of debate.

The question I have is: how much of the research funding is from the private sector? Tell me, please. As far as I know over 90% of the research funding is provided by SFI, the EU or other taxpayer-funded sources.

The next question is: who decides on the allocation of funding? Again, as far as I know, it is academics who have moved on to work with such agencies.

The final question is: where does the money go? Again, over 70% of the money goes on salaries, usually extra money for existing lecturers and professors, already the highest paid in Europe.

So to sum up, we have academics deciding which other academics should best profit from taxpayers' money. Is the taxpayer getting value for money?

No relationship with business, no relationship with Ireland inc........

This whole research agenda needs another look. I can make more nuanced and detailed arguments but the bottom line is that there is no relationship between the money spent (in particular the salaries received by researchers and academics) and the return to taxpayers.

Sorry for the rant.

Hootanany · 24-07-2010 01:07AM

Far to much and the pensions to be to be taken in to account say Fifty grand fund own pension

Godge · 24-07-2010 01:27AM

Hootanany wrote: »

Far to much and the pensions to be to be taken in to account say Fifty grand fund own pension

The actuarial cost of a civil service pension has been estimated by the Department of Finance (full of civil servants by the way) at 30%. The cost of other public service employments - police, army, fire service, prison officers, teachers, lecturers - where you can retire early or get free added years is higher again, close to 50% in some cases.

The typical public servant contributes 6.5% towards their pension plus an average pension levy of 7% giving a total of 13.5%. Given that the best private sector employers will contribute on a one-for-one basis to employees' pension schemes, civil servants are still a little short, other public servants a lot short.

Head The Wall · 24-07-2010 10:42AM

Godge wrote: »

This post gives the impression that lecturers careers depend on research and pulling in funding. I do not believe this is the case but I am willing to accept it for the sake of debate.

It does indeed seem to be the case that a Lecturers primary goal is not to lecture. And to be a good lecturer you only really need to be a good researcher. Maybe if we had lecturers that were better at lecturing we may possibly get more students to a better level when they finish college. (I don't expect lecturers to do the work like a teacher either)

Godge wrote: »

The typical public servant contributes 6.5% towards their pension plus an average pension levy of 7% giving a total of 13.5%. Given that the best private sector employers will contribute on a one-for-one basis to employees' pension schemes, civil servants are still a little short, other public servants a lot short.

Considering they are only contributing 45% of what they need to is it any wonder that there is a €108 Billion deficit in the Public Sector Pension System

Godge · 24-07-2010 09:44PM

Head The Wall wrote: »

It does indeed seem to be the case that a Lecturers primary goal is not to lecture. And to be a good lecturer you only really need to be a good researcher. Maybe if we had lecturers that were better at lecturing we may possibly get more students to a better level when they finish college. (I don't expect lecturers to do the work like a teacher either)

A number of third level institutions are running postgrads in teaching and learning (UCDs seems to be highly regarded). It may be time to make holding such a qualification a requirement for a lecturing position.

I fully agree that lecturers should not do the work like a teacher. A really good lecturer gets his/her class to think about the subject. Too often (mirroring our school system) the emphasis from both student and lecturer is on what do I need to pass this module rather than what should the learning outcomes be.

mike kelly · 27-07-2010 01:31PM

Nolanger wrote: »

Most of my lecturers were rubbish. Book memorising idiots with no real experience of what they were teaching. No wonder Irish colleges place so badly in the world rankings.

a lot of irish college courses are just a waste of time

ardmacha · 27-07-2010 01:54PM

No wonder Irish colleges place so badly in the world rankings.

Irish colleges are not placed badly in world rankings.

a lot of irish college courses are just a waste of time

A lot of those who attend them are wasters of time.

SaturnV · 27-07-2010 02:36PM

Godge wrote: »

This post gives the impression that lecturers careers depend on research and pulling in funding. I do not believe this is the case but I am willing to accept it for the sake of debate.

Sort of. Generally speaking, at the time of application, the track record in research is the biggest factor in deciding who gets hired. Promotions generally are awarded on the basis of achieving a combination of research/administrative/teaching milestones.

The question I have is: how much of the research funding is from the private sector? Tell me, please. As far as I know over 90% of the research funding is provided by SFI, the EU or other taxpayer-funded sources.

A quick look at most university websites will provide you with a lot of this information. You can find some summary date for UCD, for example, here:

This shows that UCD, in 2008/2009, received €113 million in research funding (569 awards). This includes €61.3 million from SFI, €17 million from EI, €6.2 million from IRCSET, €4.8 million from the EU, and €24 million, in 256 awards, from other sources, most of which will be non-exchequer funding.

So yes, the majority is from the state/EU, but >90% is an exaggeration. Note that this is pretty much true globally (look at the proportion of funding in, for example, the US, which comes from NIH, NSF, DoD etc.)

It is also worth noting that many funding schemes, such as some operated by SFI, are joint funding schemes, co-funded by the the exchequer and an industrial partner. Also, track record in bringing in non-exchequer funding is a selection criterion for many Irish funding agencies.

The next question is: who decides on the allocation of funding? Again, as far as I know, it is academics who have moved on to work with such agencies.

No. Generally, funding is awarded on the basis of competitive peer review. In the case of larger funding awards, this generally an international panel of experts.

The final question is: where does the money go? Again, over 70% of the money goes on salaries, usually extra money for existing lecturers and professors, already the highest paid in Europe.

A large proportion goes on salaries. Generally, >70% of the total amount would be seen as excessive, but this largely depends on the type of research being carried out. In general, 50-60% of direct costs would be allocated to salary costs. But this is not a "top up" for the lecturers to supplement their salaries. The salary costs are to pay additional staff (technical or post-doctoral staff for example) on contracts for the duration of the research project, and/or to pay the stipend and fees for postgraduate students.

Other large areas of expenditure are equipment (many large grants are for equipment only, with no salary costs), consumables, etc, etc.

Again, if you actually look at the websites of any of the funding agencies, they will detail exactly what money can be spent on, much better than I can.

So to sum up, we have academics deciding which other academics should best profit from taxpayers' money. Is the taxpayer getting value for money?

Who do you think should decide? Who has the expertise to make an informed decision?

Seriously, if you can come up with a good replacement for peer review, I'd love to hear it.

No relationship with business, no relationship with Ireland inc........

This whole research agenda needs another look. I can make more nuanced and detailed arguments but the bottom line is that there is no relationship between the money spent (in particular the salaries received by researchers and academics) and the return to taxpayers.

What would you like to see? Do you know how many successful spin out companies have formed out of academic research? How many patents are licensed? How many jobs have been created? On what basis do you claim "no relationship with business"?

Godge · 27-07-2010 10:42PM

SaturnV wrote: »

Who do you think should decide? Who has the expertise to make an informed decision?

Seriously, if you can come up with a good replacement for peer review, I'd love to hear it.

Peer review has found to be lacking in so many other cases.

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.
Lawyers deciding on lawyers being struck off.
Bishops and priests deciding on how to deal with abusive bishops and priests.
Bankers and other financial experts sitting on the boards of other banks.
Lemmings evaluating the actions of other lemmings.

We must find an alternative to peer review in so many areas of society. There is an idea for a research grant application.

Godge · 27-07-2010 11:00PM

SaturnV wrote: »

A quick look at most university websites will provide you with a lot of this information. You can find some summary date for UCD, for example, here:

This shows that UCD, in 2008/2009, received €113 million in research funding (569 awards). This includes €61.3 million from SFI, €17 million from EI, €6.2 million from IRCSET, €4.8 million from the EU, and €24 million, in 256 awards, from other sources, most of which will be non-exchequer funding.

So yes, the majority is from the state/EU, but >90% is an exaggeration. Note that this is pretty much true globally (look at the proportion of funding in, for example, the US, which comes from NIH, NSF, DoD etc.)

It is also worth noting that many funding schemes, such as some operated by SFI, are joint funding schemes, co-funded by the the exchequer and an industrial partner. Also, track record in bringing in non-exchequer funding is a selection criterion for many Irish funding agencies.

Had a quick look at that report. There are mentions for PRTLI, Health Research Board, Department of Agriculture and Food, IRCHSS and ESF which are all taxpayer-funded and would fall into the category of the 24m of other sources.

To be fair, there is mention of industry partners contributing 4.5m (over five years) to Systems Biology Ireland. The impression is certainly created that most of the 24m is from other Exchequer sources. This would certainly lead you towards a funding level close to 90% being from the exchequer.

Furthermore, give that you would expect UCD (and TCD) to be the most successful at attracting non-exchequer funding, the conclusion that third-level research is 90% funded by the taxpayer is a reasonable (though not proven) one.

TJJP · 28-07-2010 12:16AM

Godge wrote: »

Furthermore, give that you would expect UCD (and TCD) to be the most successful at attracting non-exchequer funding, the conclusion that third-level research is 90% funded by the taxpayer is a reasonable (though not proven) one.

http://www.forfas.ie/publication/search.jsp?ft=/publications/2010/Title,6497,en.php

SaturnV · 28-07-2010 10:27AM

Godge wrote: »

Peer review has found to be lacking in so many other cases.

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.
Lawyers deciding on lawyers being struck off.
Bishops and priests deciding on how to deal with abusive bishops and priests.
Bankers and other financial experts sitting on the boards of other banks.
Lemmings evaluating the actions of other lemmings.

We must find an alternative to peer review in so many areas of society. There is an idea for a research grant application.

Fair point. It's not a perfect system. In many cases, it's clearly not appropriate. But until someone comes up with something better, in specific regard to academic research funding, it's the best system we have.

SaturnV · 28-07-2010 10:30AM

Godge wrote: »

Had a quick look at that report. There are mentions for PRTLI, Health Research Board, Department of Agriculture and Food, IRCHSS and ESF which are all taxpayer-funded and would fall into the category of the 24m of other sources.

To be fair, there is mention of industry partners contributing 4.5m (over five years) to Systems Biology Ireland. The impression is certainly created that most of the 24m is from other Exchequer sources. This would certainly lead you towards a funding level close to 90% being from the exchequer.

Furthermore, give that you would expect UCD (and TCD) to be the most successful at attracting non-exchequer funding, the conclusion that third-level research is 90% funded by the taxpayer is a reasonable (though not proven) one.

Actually, I looked a bit more deeply after my post, and you're probably not far off with 90% in fairness.

I'll assume for a moment (while acknowledging that I might be wrong), that you are not against the basic principle of government funding research. Now, the real question is whether this represents value for money? How is that assessed?

ardmacha · 28-07-2010 11:28AM

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.

I believe that the reviewers were initially provided with a very carefully selected amount of information to review in this case.

That said the problem with cases like Neary in Ireland is that the circle is too small, international reviewers are needed too.

steveo010 · 20-08-2013 10:54PM

so many unsubstantiated comments to the effect that Irish lecturers are "the best paid in the world' - or at least in Europe - either people have not informed themselves - or they have and are deliberately ignoring the facts.

Lecturers everywhere get paid on a scale - some do not get anywhere near as much as others do - even when they are doing exactly the same job as others in the same college or university - how many places in 'private' industry does this happen?

So - an Irish lecturer at the top of their pay scale will of course get paid more than say an English lecturer at the bottom of their scale - so what are the respective scales" - well simply look them up online

in England the scale seems to progress from - point 8 = £23,546 (27,508.09 euro) to point 68 = £88,755 (103,689.8 euro)

In Ireland the pay scale seems to progress from point 1 = € 39,715 for an assistant lecturer (IOT) to Senior Lecturer 3 at the top of the pay scale 9 = 9 €104,770

This is for IOT - not universities - but from this we can see that the Irish pay is indeed more at the lower lever but very similar at the higher lever.

So - lets compare this with some other jobs - a plumber = €20,072 - €71,843 - so a top earning plummer caan be earning a lot more than a lecturer at the bottom of their scale - at lecturer whose might have spend considerable time getting 'qualified' - say to Masters lever - and remember - an apprentice plumber will get paid during training - while a lecturer will not and it could well take a lecturer about 19 years to reach as much as the 71,843 at the top of the plumber scale - so - during those years they are not earning anything significantly more than a plumber! not really much of a situation to really recommend a career in lecturing - also - how many plumbers earn a lot more doing of the books 'freelance' jobs

robp · 21-08-2013 01:01AM

steveo010 wrote: »

so many unsubstantiated comments to the effect that Irish lecturers are "the best paid in the world' - or at least in Europe - either people have not informed themselves - or they have and are deliberately ignoring the facts.

Lecturers everywhere get paid on a scale - some do not get anywhere near as much as others do - even when they are doing exactly the same job as others in the same college or university - how many places in 'private' industry does this happen?

So - an Irish lecturer at the top of their pay scale will of course get paid more than say an English lecturer at the bottom of their scale - so what are the respective scales" - well simply look them up online

in England the scale seems to progress from - point 8 = £23,546 (27,508.09 euro) to point 68 = £88,755 (103,689.8 euro)

In Ireland the pay scale seems to progress from point 1 = € 39,715 for an assistant lecturer (IOT) to Senior Lecturer 3 at the top of the pay scale 9 = 9 €104,770

This is for IOT - not universities - but from this we can see that the Irish pay is indeed more at the lower lever but very similar at the higher lever.

So - lets compare this with some other jobs - a plumber = €20,072 - €71,843 - so a top earning plummer caan be earning a lot more than a lecturer at the bottom of their scale - at lecturer whose might have spend considerable time getting 'qualified' - say to Masters lever - and remember - an apprentice plumber will get paid during training - while a lecturer will not and it could well take a lecturer about 19 years to reach as much as the 71,843 at the top of the plumber scale - so - during those years they are not earning anything significantly more than a plumber! not really much of a situation to really recommend a career in lecturing - also - how many plumbers earn a lot more doing of the books 'freelance' jobs

I think this is an old enough thread. One thing worth noting though is with the pay cuts the typical Irish university lecturers will actually start out lower then the UK equivalent. Also the UK rates at the senior positions are anomalously low internally. They just wouldn't compare well with Ireland. For example a prof in Cambridge may earn less then an Irish GP.

Godge · 21-08-2013 02:33PM

steveo010 wrote: »

so many unsubstantiated comments to the effect that Irish lecturers are "the best paid in the world' - or at least in Europe - either people have not informed themselves - or they have and are deliberately ignoring the facts.

Lecturers everywhere get paid on a scale - some do not get anywhere near as much as others do - even when they are doing exactly the same job as others in the same college or university - how many places in 'private' industry does this happen?

So - an Irish lecturer at the top of their pay scale will of course get paid more than say an English lecturer at the bottom of their scale - so what are the respective scales" - well simply look them up online

in England the scale seems to progress from - point 8 = £23,546 (27,508.09 euro) to point 68 = £88,755 (103,689.8 euro)

In Ireland the pay scale seems to progress from point 1 = € 39,715 for an assistant lecturer (IOT) to Senior Lecturer 3 at the top of the pay scale 9 = 9 €104,770

This is for IOT - not universities - but from this we can see that the Irish pay is indeed more at the lower lever but very similar at the higher lever.

So - lets compare this with some other jobs - a plumber = €20,072 - €71,843 - so a top earning plummer caan be earning a lot more than a lecturer at the bottom of their scale - at lecturer whose might have spend considerable time getting 'qualified' - say to Masters lever - and remember - an apprentice plumber will get paid during training - while a lecturer will not and it could well take a lecturer about 19 years to reach as much as the 71,843 at the top of the plumber scale - so - during those years they are not earning anything significantly more than a plumber! not really much of a situation to really recommend a career in lecturing - also - how many plumbers earn a lot more doing of the books 'freelance' jobs

https://admin.kuleuven.be/personeel/wedde/graadbarema/ap/barema11.pdf

Here is a Dutch payscale, topping out at €68,633 well below your €104,770.

Qualitymark · 21-08-2013 06:23PM

Godge wrote: »

https://admin.kuleuven.be/personeel/wedde/graadbarema/ap/barema11.pdf

Here is a Dutch payscale, topping out at €68,633 well below your €104,770.

Yeah, but the Dutch are, well, normal about money.

robp · 21-08-2013 10:10PM

Godge wrote: »

https://admin.kuleuven.be/personeel/wedde/graadbarema/ap/barema11.pdf

Here is a Dutch payscale, topping out at €68,633 well below your €104,770.

They go up to 105k in some universities.

Wil van der Putten · 19-01-2014 08:52PM

Last time I looked KU Leuven is actually in Belgium .... not Netherlands..
also, with respect to Dutch salaries, it is worth remembering that all salaries in the Netherlands have an additional 8 % in May (vakantie geld = holiday pay) and typically a 13th Month pay in December. THis is NOT mentioned in most official payscales.. Real salaries are thus about 15 % higher than those quoted in official scales.

Cheers, W

srsly78 · 19-01-2014 10:52PM

It's actually even crazier than that in Belgium. They (everyone) get an extra 1.5 months pay as a bonus after 12 months. Also they get mandatory food vouchers, or the cash equivalent - something like e6 per day worked.

If it makes you feel any better they also have to pay insane tax on that.

a-ha · 28-03-2014 12:09AM

Godge wrote: »

Peer review has found to be lacking in so many other cases.

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.
Lawyers deciding on lawyers being struck off.
Bishops and priests deciding on how to deal with abusive bishops and priests.
Bankers and other financial experts sitting on the boards of other banks.
Lemmings evaluating the actions of other lemmings.

We must find an alternative to peer review in so many areas of society. There is an idea for a research grant application.

Double blind peer review - this is what the top journals use: you don't know whose work you are reviewing, and they don't know who is reviewing their work.

Godge · 28-03-2014 11:26AM

a-ha wrote: »

Double blind peer review - this is what the top journals use: you don't know whose work you are reviewing, and they don't know who is reviewing their work.

It doesn't stop groupthink.

buiscuit2168 · 29-03-2014 07:36AM

The wages seem low compared to secondary school teachers. My friend who is in her early fifties earns €70,000 and is planning to retire in the next year or two. Her contact hours are 22 hours a week, 3 months summer holidays, two one week mid term breaks, Easter and Christmas holidays.

No academic research, no academic papers, at this stage she churns out the same papers year after year. Universities and colleges in this country not only compete with each other but on an international scale as well, so it is in their interest whoever lectures there to produce outstanding students in order to get funding.

Personally, I thought lecturers earned a lot more than that because teachers do nothing but moan. They have 702 hours per year - a normal public servant will work 1776.

Qualitymark · 29-03-2014 12:42PM

Rather than getting anxious about the see-sawing salary rates for different jobs, would we not be better off trying to get a certain amount of equality - good for the economy, good for work.

sarumite · 29-03-2014 05:51PM

Godge wrote: »

Peer review has found to be lacking in so many other cases.

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.
Lawyers deciding on lawyers being struck off.
Bishops and priests deciding on how to deal with abusive bishops and priests.
Bankers and other financial experts sitting on the boards of other banks.
Lemmings evaluating the actions of other lemmings.

We must find an alternative to peer review in so many areas of society. There is an idea for a research grant application.

I don't think any scientist thinks that peer review is perfect, anymore than I suspect someone in the law profession would argue that jury based peer judgement is perfect. Unfortunately, we haven't come up with an alternative and I have yet to see a viable alternative being offered. A proper 'peer review' would require each experiment to be reproduced and verified in an independent manner. Unfortunately there is a limited amount of money available for original research never mind double checking someone elses work. Even if the money was available you would need to find someone suitably qualified and willing to do such laborious work in an environment with the necessary rescources which would itself be a challenge. Its one thing to say we must find an alternative, its another thing altogether to actually find that alternative.

Sheldons Brain · 29-03-2014 08:05PM

Doctors (including academic doctors) reviewing Michael Neary in Drogheda.

I'm aware of some discussion about this process which suggests that the reviewers were presented with a carefully selected unrepresentative set of data and the process did not allow them request other data. There are lessons to be learned, to be sure, but perhaps not that review is inappropriate.

robp · 29-03-2014 10:34PM

Qualitymark wrote: »

Rather than getting anxious about the see-sawing salary rates for different jobs, would we not be better off trying to get a certain amount of equality - good for the economy, good for work.

I know its a cliché but they really do exist in an international market and having a possibility of competitive salaries is very useful in attracting talent. There is always a relative shortage of brilliant academics and it helps to have a few extra tools to lure them to our shores.

maryishere · 30-03-2014 12:02AM

lovetheanimals wrote: »

The wages seem low compared to secondary school teachers. My friend who is in her early fifties earns €70,000 and is planning to retire in the next year or two. Her contact hours are 22 hours a week, 3 months summer holidays, two one week mid term breaks, Easter and Christmas holidays.

No academic research, no academic papers, at this stage she churns out the same papers year after year.

tis a disgrace that people with cushy part time jobs like that get paid so much at the taxpayers expense, when average industrial wage in the country is less than half that.

chopper6 · 01-04-2014 03:49PM

maryishere wrote: »

tis a disgrace that people with cushy part time jobs like that get paid so much at the taxpayers expense, when average industrial wage in the country is less than half that.

Study and become one then.

Or maybe you think uneducated idiots should be teaching our students?

Salary of a Lecturer

Comments