Letter to Department of Labor from US postdocs and supporters
August 28, 2015
Mary Ziegler
Direction, Division of Regulations, Legislation, and Interpretation
Wage & Hour Division
US Department of Labor
200 Constitution Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20210
Dear Director Ziegler,
We, the postdoctoral associations of multiple major US research institutions, are writing to you on behalf of the community of US postdoctoral researchers (hereafter referred to as postdocs) to comment on the proposed rulemaking under docket WHD-2015-0001. We write (1) to strongly support the proposed change in salary threshold for executive/administrative/ professional workers, and (2) to specifically propose the listing of postdoctoral scholars as an example occupation in regulatory guidance.
Postdocs are an excellent example of the type of knowledge worker the Administration seeks to protect – professionals who have advanced degrees and are essential to the economy, but are often expected to work overtime without compensation. A postdoc, by definition, has an advanced degree and performs work that is intellectual in character, as described under 29 CFR 45, Section 13(a)(1). He/she regularly exercises discretion and judgment, and is expected to independently plan and carry out scientific experiments at the frontiers of human knowledge. Most academic labs at top-tier universities depend on postdocs' skills and independence to function. The research is critical for the advancement of medical treatments and is universally acknowledged as a high societal priority. In addition, biomedical research drives economic growth and innovation, which are crucial for the global competitive status of the United States.
In his Presidential Memorandum, President Obama indicated that the rationale for this rulemaking is that the current overtime exemption salary of $23,660 per year has allowed middle-class workers to be squeezed with longer hours at lower salaries. Postdocs are an excellent example of this problem. They are some of the most highly educated workers in America, and some of the most dedicated – working between 50-60 hours per week (see reference 1). However, because postdocs clearly meet the learned professional exemption, that overtime is not compensated. The US biomedical system has adopted the practice of demanding these heavy workloads from postdocs while compensating most of them with low salaries (approximately $16.00 per hour, compared to the average hourly wage of $23.22 in the United States regardless of level of education; see reference 1). Further, postdocs generally work at research universities, which tend to cluster in areas with high costs of living. Thus, some of the most highly-educated and trained workers in America (postdocs) do not earn enough money to make ends meet. The persistently low salary and overtime-exempt status of this profession have led to precisely the type of worker abuse that the regulation seeks to end.
These issues have been studied by the biomedical research community and recommendations have emerged to raise the salaries of postdoctoral researchers to $50,000 or above (see references 2 & 3). The proposed Department of Labor regulation would be a step in this direction. That said, few universities wish to install time-card clocks in every laboratory hallway. We expect the effect of the Department's regulation to be that most institutions will raise postdoc minimum salaries to the rule's threshold of roughly $50,440. Therefore, the proposed regulation would be assisting the research enterprise in achieving the recommendations that it itself has recognized as necessary, but has failed to implement (see references 2 & 3). It would also be aligned with President Obama’s aims of rewarding hard working middle class workers who are making invaluable contributions to our economy. We note that postdocs are generally young professionals in their late-20s to mid-30s. They are hoping to start homes, have children, and join the strong middle class that makes America great. This proposed rule would have exactly this effect.
In the Notice, the Department also requested (under Section F) "comments on what specific additional examples of nonexempt and exempt occupations would be most helpful to include" in future regulatory guidance. We believe that postdoctoral scholars (sometimes termed "postdoctoral fellows") would be an excellent example. They exercise substantial discretion, judgment, and technical skill. However, they are also often paid below the proposed salary threshold of $50,440. Specifically calling this out would send a clear signal to academic employers that the Department understands this situation and intends to provide guidance that would require either overtime pay or an exempt-level salary. This would be helpful, as academic employers frequently encounter confusion related to Federal workplace legislation and the dual roles of many employees (including postdocs) as both worker and trainee. We would strongly benefit from clear Federal guidance that gives our employers certainty as to their legal obligations.
Finally, as you complete the rule-making process, we ask that you re-emphasize in the final Rule and associated guidance the Department's firm position on mis-classification. While most postdocs primarily use the resources and facilities of an academic institution, their financial support may arise from the institution's own funds or instead from independent fellowships (e.g., sponsored research grants from the Federal government). Many institutions classify some of their postdocs as non-employees solely because they obtained a fellowship, even though the postdoc works at the institution, is directed by a member of its faculty, and uses its facilities. Reminding employers that postdocs, regardless of their funding source, do have an employer-employee relationship with the institution where they perform research and that this constitutes the economic reality of the situation would be very beneficial to those we represent.
We thank you for this thoughtful and necessary proposal and the chance to comment on it. Any requests for clarification should be addressed to the postdoctoral community via the following email address:
Sincerely,
The undersigned community of US postdoctoral researchers and supporters:
1. Brain and Cognitive Sciences Postdoctoral Community at MIT (including postdocs from the Dept. of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, Picower Institute for Learning and Memory and McGovern Institute for Brain Research at MIT), Cambridge, MA
2. Postdoctoral Association of Tufts University, Medford MA
3. Postdoctoral Association of Brandeis University, Waltham, MA
4. Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research Postdoctoral Association (WIPDA), Cambridge, MA
5. Members of Harvard University that organize in favor of postdoc issues, Cambridge, MA
6. Postdoctoral and Graduate Student Association of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA
References
1. Stephan, P. How to Exploit Postdocs. BioScience 63, 245–246 (2013).
2. The postdoctoral experience revisited. (The National Academies Press, 2014).
3. Pickett, C. L., Corb, B. W., Matthews, C. R., Sundquist, W. I. & Berg, J. M. Toward a sustainable biomedical research enterprise: Finding consensus and implementing recommendations. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 201509901 (2015). doi:10.1073/pnas.1509901112
