RSE position terms


#1

Given that 42% of responding (to the US 2017 RSE survey - see results in https://github.com/softwaresaved/international-survey/blob/master/analysis/results_us_2017_narrative.ipynb) RSEs are employed permanently as long as funding is available, 40% are employed permanently on institutional core funds, and 15% are employed fixed term, is this reasonable?

How does it compare to other researchers and other research staff?

Is there a role for URSSI to play here?


#2

I think there could be, in collaboration with the international RSE community.

One of the things that came out of the international RSE leaders meeting in January was a desire/plan to start assembling “evidence banks” about how current RSE groups are organized, funded, etc. as well as arguments/justifications that have been used with university administrators to get people behind formal RSE groups.

URSSI could act as a clearinghouse/liaison to the US RSE community in activities like this – helping to lead and build the RSE community in the US. And in doing so, monitoring this same kind of information across the US over time.

The international evidence bank idea is useful, but some of the information will be of limited utility because funding models, etc. vary from country to country. So I think each country would benefit from a national-level organization to help collect and exchange information, experience, etc. URSSI could get that going.


#3

I recall a discussion at perhaps the first RSE meeting about developing position descriptions (plural) for RSEs as both as an aid as well as visibility for the career paths.