Job shortage hits older physicists hardestGloria B. Lubkin Citation: Phys. Today 24(5), 61 (1971); doi: 10.1063/1.3022761 View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3022761 View Table of Contents: http://www.physicstoday.org/resource/1/PHTOAD/v24/i5 Published by the AIP Publishing LLC. Additional resources for Physics TodayHomepage: http://www.physicstoday.org/ Information: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us Daily Edition: http://www.physicstoday.org/daily_edition

Downloaded 02 Aug 2013 to 190.79.121.121. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms

NEWS

state & societyLoans for out-of-work scientists proposedA bill to provide long-term guaranteedloans for unemployed scientists and en-gineers was introduced by Senator Ed-ward Kennedy (D-Mass.) and by Repre-sentatives John W. Davis (D-Ga.) andRobert N. Giaimo (D-Conn.) on 16March. The bill is intended to sup-plement the Conversion Research andEducation Bill of 1971, introduced bythe same men late in January.

In introducing the loan bill Kennedynoted that the unemployment rate forscientists and engineers was 3% in Janu-ary, the highest level for professionalpersonnel since the Federal Governmentstarted keeping such statistics in 1958.Kennedy acknowledged that althoughmany Americans are unemployed,scientists and engineers are a specialgroup, whose talents can be convertedfrom defense and space to civilian,socially useful programs. He said thatthese men will undoubtedly eventuallyfind jobs at salaries equal to or greaterthan their old ones.

The bill would offer each unemployedscientist or engineer a "conversionloan" to assist him in making thetransition, for an amount up to 60% ofhis previous salary, to a maximum of$12 000 for the loan. He would beginrepaying the loan three months afterhe finds a job with a salary equal to at

least two-thirds of his previous salary.The program would be administered byNSF, which would be authorized $200million over a three-year period to coverinterest and default insurance. Whilean individual was unemployed, NSFwould pay the interest on the loan.After reemployment, the individualwould pay 3% interest, and NSF wouldpay the difference between 3% and theactual amount of interest charged forthe loan. The amount of money avail-able for loans is estimated to be over$500 million dollars annually.

The Conversion Research and Edu-continued on page 64

KENNEDY

Job shortage hits older physicists hardestThe main burden of the present employ-ment crisis is being borne by the moreexperienced physicist, not the more visi-ble new PhD's. In 1970 about 1500 newPhD's and 1700 experienced PhD'swere looking for positions. Of thesemore than 30% of those looking for jobsin traditional areas of physics in theUS failed to find them. An increasingnumber of physicists are finding jobs

White House finds $42m to help jobless technologistsA $42-million program to find jobs andhelp retrain unemployed scientists andtechnicians was announced by theWhite House on 1 April. The new pro-gram, which will be administered bythe Department of Labor's ManpowerDivision, will use funds already avail-able in this year's budget.

The Federal Government and pro-fessional societies will join in promot-ing new jobs. The recently estab-lished National Registry for Scientistsand Engineers, which acts as a centralclearinghouse for applications and jobopenings throughout the US, is to beexpanded.

Secretary of Labor James D. Hodg-son said that out of the $42 million,$25 million would go for retraining sothat engineers and scientists can re-direct their talents into fields such as

the environment, urban problems,health and safety engineering. A"job-search" program, which wouldallow 20 000 job seekers to look foremployment in new regions of thecountry, would cost $5 million. Re-location funds would go to 10 000families, at a cost of $10 million.Two million dollars would fund a pro-gram in which small groups of pro-fessionals would seek methods forgiving technological help to traditionalsectors of the economy.

The new program was announced ata meeting in San Clemente, Calif, be-tween aerospace and defense officialsand some representatives of profes-sional societies and universities. Itwas the second in what is expected tobe a series of technological-unemploy-ment meetings.

abroad. The percentage of unem-ployed, now about 4% for new PhD's,and 1.5-2.5% for all of physics, is grow-ing. These are some of the findings ofthe American Physical Society Eco-nomic Concerns Committee, headed byLee Grodzins (MIT). A report on thefindings can be obtamed from Grodzinsand will appear in the June Bulletin ofthe American Physical Society.

Grodzins constructed a flow chart ofPhD employment in 1967 (which he callsthe last of the "good" years) and com-pared it with a chart for 1970. (See fig-ures 1 and 2.) In 1967 the number ofemployed physicists increased by about1200. • Most of the new employees werenew PhD's, but about 150 entered fromabroad or came from other fields. By1970 the flow of new jobs had diminishedto a dribble: No more than 100 addi-tional jobs were available. So therewere at least 1000 fewer openings in1970 than in 1967 while the number ofnew PhD's was 20% greater.

Of these 1500 new PhD's about 1100found acceptable positions and about400 did not. (Perhaps 200 would nothave sought such positions in the US ina normal year.) The experienced PhD'sfared much worse: Only about 900 outof the 1700 looking for jobs found newones. So over a three-year period thesituation changed from an undersupplyof doctorates to an oversupply almost

PHYSICS TODAY / MAY 1971 61Downloaded 02 Aug 2013 to 190.79.121.121. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms

Leftold positions*

300 -*-

500 •*-

400

350

1550

Faculty5500

Non-faculty2100

Industry3700

Gov.,FFRDC,

other 3400

Enterednew positions

— 930

— 700

650

450

Change inemployed PhD's (%)

( + 9%)

( + 7%)

( + 3%)

Leftold positions*

400 •*-

700 •*-

14 700 2730 ( + 8%) = 1180

400

400

1900

Faculty7300

Non-faculty2700

Industry5000

Gov.,FFRDC,

other 5000

Enterednew positions

— 700

— 700

300

300

Change inemployed PhD's (%)

( + 4%)t

(0%)

(-2%)

(-2%)

20|000 2000 ( + 0.5%) = 100

15501400

Reentered2730 1300.

new PhD's

150D + R

160 enteredfrom abroad or i

from other fields I

130 left voluntarily ]i

19001700

Reentered

200

D + R

9002000

800

1100

, 400

1500new PhD's

Not in US physics jobs

38%

1500 in 1970

Postdoctoral(instructor,res. assoc.)

11.5% Physicsfaculty

3% Non-physicsfaculty

11.5%Industry

7% Gov., FFRDC(not postdocs)

28.5%

14%Left country

4%Left physics

1.5%Unknown Unemployed

2.5%Underemployed

"12.5%Army

Flux of PhD employment in 1967 (upperleft). FFRDC are federally-funded re-search and development centers. Num-bers for faculty came from direct countof physics faculty directories. For othersectors the changes in employment camefrom averages over 1964-1968 accord-ing to American Science Manpower series.* includes 1 % death and retirement(D+R) and t includes upgrading of fac-ulty. Figure 1

Flux of PhD employment in 1970 (right).Remarks for figure 1 apply, except thatchanges in employment in non-facultysectors were estimated from surveys andfrom information supplied by fundingagencies. Figure 2

Whereabouts of about 1500 PhD's (lowerleft) who graduated from September1969 through September 1970 (based on750 PhD's and complete returns from 38schools). Figure 3

equal to the production rate. The num-ber of experienced physicists who leftthe field was almost as big as the num-ber of new PhD's entering the profes-sion.

New PhD's. The committee sur-veyed 38 graduate schools (750 PhD's)to find out what happened to the rough-ly 1500 PhD's who graduated betweenSeptember 1969 and September 1970(see figure 3). Grodzins points outthat the 4% unemployed is a disasterfigure; the prospective graduate hasalready been looking for a job for sixmonths before he earns his degree.

The "underemployed" classifica-tion includes mainly high school andcommunity-college positions.

The percentage of new PhD's takingpostdoctorals is apparently less than itwas in 1969, though the total number of

postdoctorals in the US is probablyunchanged, suggesting that the "hold-ing pattern" observed last year is nowtrying to rescue present postdoctoralsrather than new PhD's.

Experienced PhD's. The new PhDis more easily employable than the ex-perienced one, Grodzins says, becausehe is more mobile, will work for lessand requires less financial support.His major professor, his departmentand the professional societies will alltry to find him a job. The older one ismuch less visible and receives much lesshelp.

The massive layoffs such as the oneat the NASA Electronics Research Cen-ter in Cambridge, Mass, are qualitative-ly different than normal attrition orforced lay-offs of small groups, Grod-zins points out. When the center closed

last July the 48 physics PhD's still therealready had six months' notice; byNovember, 19 were still unemployed,despite a concerted placement effort byNASA.

The committee studied what hap-pened to all individuals entering or leav-ing certain institutions from October1969 through October 1970, samplingcertain universities and national lab-oratories. Among the 158 physicistswho were in faculty positions in 42 PhD-granting institutions in 1969-70 andwere not there in 1970-71, 48 of themleft traditional physics in the US. (Thetotal of positions in the departmentswas 1387.)

Five national laboratories were stud-ied: Argonne, Brookhaven, Livermore,Los Alamos and Oak Ridge. One hun-dred PhD physicists left; their average

62 PHYSICS TODAY / MAY 1971Downloaded 02 Aug 2013 to 190.79.121.121. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms

age was 38. Seventy-nine PhD's werehired, with an average age of 30. Ex-cept in postdoctoral-type jobs, theyounger physicist did not displace anolder physicist in any direct fashion,Grodzins says. In one lab, for example,new physicists were hired for a largeproject where there was a long-termcommitment; at the same time, becauseof a decrease in the lab's overall budget,it essentially closed down an entire pro-gram in a completely different subfieldof physics. Of the 100 who left, 45 leftthe country, left physics, were unem-ployed or their status was unknown.(Most of the latter were unemployedwhen they left the labs.)

What of the future? For the nextfew years, Grodzins says, there willcontinue to be a severe imbalance be-tween the training and aspirations of

the students and the opportunities thatwill exist. In 1970 about 23% of thenew PhD's specialized in particle phys-ics and 20% in nuclear physics. Neitherfield has grown significantly in the pastfew years, but because of the new parti-cle accelerators throughout the US, itwill be difficult to stem their flow:The number of graduate students now inthe pipeline for particle physics willsustain the output for several years.But at least 75% of them will have tofind jobs outside the field.

Grodzins believes that during the1970's physics faculties will probablyneed no more than 300-500 new PhD'sper year. Forty percent of the PhD'sare on faculties. If the other kinds ofjobs grow at the same rate, only 800-1200 new phD's per year will be needed.Taking attrition into account, the need

will be no greater than 1400 PhD's peryear, he estimates.

What can we do? For the near futureGrodzins feels we must find new oppor-tunities for physicists, such as jobs inhospitals, as science advisers to secon-dary-school systems, in junior colleges,and working on societal needs. Grod-zins says we ought to reduce the self-interest pressures that sustain the flowof students into graduate school. Onetemporary solution is to reduce thenumber of graduate assistantships,putting the money saved into postdoc-torate positions. (The latest versionof this scheme is known as the "ArdenHouse Proposal.") Standards for thePhD should be tightened, and the PhDprogram should not train the physicistonly for the kind of career for whichfew opportunities exist. —GBL

Budget office seeks guidance on science problemsThe Office of Management and Budgethas a strong disposition to support sci-ence and technology, according to Wil-liam D. Carey, formerly assistant di-rector of the old Bureau of the Budget,now the OMB. (Carey is now seniorstaff consultant at Arthur D. Little Inc).Speaking to a seminar on science andpublic policy held at the NationalAcademy of Sciences 22-24 February,and sponsored by the Council for theAdvancement of Science Writing,Carey, who was with the BOB for 26years, said that the OMB regards itselfas a friend of science, despite the con-trary opinion of many scientists. Overthe years BOB repeatedly asked thescientific community for guidance onscientific priorities, he said, but to noavail. OMB is still looking for suchcriteria of choice.

The OMB view of NSF has changed,he said, and NSF is being led closer tohard problems in the market place,with the emphasis on applied research.In the past, he noted, there was a revul-sion towards tainting the NSF with anyapplied research.

Last year there were oft-repeated ru-mors that the Office of Science andTechnology had been shut out of thefinal stages of the budget preparation.Carey confirmed the truth of the rumor.In the old days the director's reviewin the BOB would be attended by manyinterested parties. Then this openmeeting became a closed one, and OSTdid not participate. Now OST andOMB have become friends again.

At the same meeting CongressmanEdward Boland (D-Mass.) pointed outthat the Subcommittee on IndependentOffices and Housing and Urban De-velopment (Appropriations), whosechairmanship he just assumed, is re-sponsible for considering the NSF bud-get. After the House Science and As-

tronautics Committee has authorizeda budget, it is Boland's subcommitteethat recommends the appropriation.Their recommendation is never formore money than has been authorized,frequently for less. Boland said thatin his judgment the NSF budget willincrease substantially. He noted thatbecause of the Mansfield amendmentthere is a tendency to shift mission-agency research to NSF.

Presidential Science Adviser EdwardE. David Jr, in his remarks to the meet-

ing, said that he feels the most seriousproblem facing the nation "is the in-creasing alienation of people in oursociety from rational ways of thought."He said that society is losing the cour-age to experiment. As an example, heinsisted that we must "build those ex-perimental supersonic vehicles whichwill lead us to understand whether ornot supersonic travel is feasible.Make no mistake, a limitation on ex-perimentation in whatever cause is thebeginning of a wider suppression." GBL

CERN II begins at last with support from ten nationsAfter considerable behind-the scenesmaneuvering, CERN will at last getits 300-GeV accelerator. At a Councilmeeting on 19 February three na-tions (Netherlands, Norway andSweden) that had held back from a finaldecision declared their approval; sonow ten countries will be participating.The total cost of the eight-year con-struction program will be 1150 millionSwiss francs (at 1970 prices), and the1971 budget will be 29.3 million Swissfrancs.

CERN expects to start immediatelyrecruiting heads of design and con-struction groups so that site work can

begin this summer. Research is sched-uled to begin in 1976. The 300-GeVlaboratory, to be known as "CERN II,"has John B. Adams as Director General.Willibald Jentschke is Director Generalof CERN I. When the new acceleratoris completed the programs of bothlaboratories will be united under thedirection of a single Director General.

The cost of the program is to beshared as follows: Austria 2.01%, Bel-gium 3.88%, France 20.48%, FederalRepublic of Germany 23.96%, Italy13.27%, Netherlands 4.56%, Norway1.57%, Sweden 4.72%, Switzerland3.30%, United Kingdom 22.25%.

KMS Industries will do classified fusion researchThe Atomic Energy Commission hasgiven permission to KMS Industries,Inc to. conduct research at its own ex-pense on a controlled-fusion idea, butwill require that the work be classifiedbecause of its potential weapons appli-cations. This appears to be the firsttime a private firm has been allowed by

AEC to work on a device that is poten-tially explosive. The idea would use ahigh-power short-pulse laser to irradiatepellets of thermonuclear material, heat-ing them to thermonuclear tempera-tures very rapidly, and possibly lead toa controlled release of thermonuclearenergy.

PHYSICS TODAY / MAY 1971 63Downloaded 02 Aug 2013 to 190.79.121.121. This article is copyrighted as indicated in the abstract. Reuse of AIP content is subject to the terms at: http://www.physicstoday.org/about_us/terms