Comments on: US Physics in trouble too http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/ The Universe, the Internet, and Academic Life Wed, 23 Dec 2009 15:26:10 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Another anonymous physicist http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4789 Another anonymous physicist Sat, 12 Jan 2008 10:57:46 +0000 http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4789 Diamond is NOT part of RAL. In fact, there is resentment on the RAL side. For instance the accelerator people at diamond get paid more and have just had a 4.9% rise (above the public sector limits) because it's a PLC. The accelerator people on ISIS get paid less and have not had ANY rise, even though they do virtually the same job. The fact that diamond is private means they get away with murder. If you ask me it's a disgrace. Diamond is NOT part of RAL. In fact, there is resentment on the RAL side. For instance the accelerator people at diamond get paid more and have just had a 4.9% rise (above the public sector limits) because it’s a PLC. The accelerator people on ISIS get paid less and have not had ANY rise, even though they do virtually the same job. The fact that diamond is private means they get away with murder.
If you ask me it’s a disgrace.

]]> By: andyxl http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4745 andyxl Wed, 09 Jan 2008 23:30:58 +0000 http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4745 The Private Eye thing is completely daft. Diamond being a company is just an artificial device. It's really part of Rutherford Lab. Its a short walk from Diamond to the RAL canteen. Burnett, Wade etc being Board members is the least I would expect, and expecting them to list this on the register of interests would be plain silly. Re user fees etc : I haven't heard anybody say they can't do this. It wasn't the way things were set up, but I hope this is being explored. The other Research Councils might have a natural resistance to this; and for example demand extra in their budgets if they have to do this etc; so although its probably good in the long term it won't help in the long term The Private Eye thing is completely daft. Diamond being a company is just an artificial device. It’s really part of Rutherford Lab. Its a short walk from Diamond to the RAL canteen. Burnett, Wade etc being Board members is the least I would expect, and expecting them to list this on the register of interests would be plain silly.

Re user fees etc : I haven’t heard anybody say they can’t do this. It wasn’t the way things were set up, but I hope this is being explored. The other Research Councils might have a natural resistance to this; and for example demand extra in their budgets if they have to do this etc; so although its probably good in the long term it won’t help in the long term

]]> By: Rob http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4744 Rob Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:00:45 +0000 http://andyxl.wordpress.com/2008/01/08/us-physics-in-trouble-too/#comment-4744 what do you make of the private eye article on mark lancaster's page, andy? and can you explain why STFC cannot levy a simple but fair charge for use of Diamond as part of their efforts to recoup £80M? what do you make of the private eye article on mark lancaster’s page, andy? and can you explain why STFC cannot levy a simple but fair charge for use of Diamond as part of their efforts to recoup £80M?

]]>