CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

JudgeMental said:

CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

The_observer said:

JudgeMental said:

CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

dv said:

The_observer said:

JudgeMental said:

CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Great then, they can go earn a living

JudgeMental said:

CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

Tony Abbott is the Minister for anti-science

dv said:

The_observer said:

JudgeMental said:

CSIRO: one in three staff ‘seriously considering’ quitting

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Rich tapestry…

the CSIRO should have about 12,000 + positions

CrazyNeutrino said:

the CSIRO should have about 12,000 + positions

no it ‘shouldn’t’ have any

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

the CSIRO should have about 12,000 + positions

no it ‘shouldn’t’ have any

Really?

Why?

The_observer said:

dv said:

The_observer said:

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Great then, they can go earn a living

Great! They will. That’s the point. They’ll be alright personally. Australia will be in worse shape. I’m glad you realise the import.

The_observer said:

dv said:

The_observer said:

where on earth will they get another tax payer funded jobbie

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Great then, they can go earn a living

I take it Observer that the CSIRO has said something that you don’t agree with?

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

the CSIRO should have about 12,000 + positions

no it ‘shouldn’t’ have any

Really?

Why?

private enterprise

They could always take up water divining in their spare time.

dv said:

The_observer said:

dv said:

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Great then, they can go earn a living

Great! They will. That’s the point. They’ll be alright personally. Australia will be in worse shape. I’m glad you realise the import.

worse shape,,, nah we save a heap of money.

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

no it ‘shouldn’t’ have any

Really?

Why?

private enterprise

Could you please expand?

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

dv said:

Why would they want one? Public sector pay is rubbish.

Great then, they can go earn a living

I take it Observer that the CSIRO has said something that you don’t agree with?

divining

Skeptic Pete said:

They could always take up water divining in their spare time.

They might even prove a point.

Hey observer, how about listing all the great achievements of the CSIRO

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

Really?

Why?

private enterprise

Could you please expand?

private sector

CrazyNeutrino said:

Hey observer, how about listing all the great achievements of the CSIRO

Hills hoist … LOL

no but, it should be privatised

How did it happen that conservatives like the_obs ended up so strongly anti-science these days?

It was not always so. It was PM Bruce that founded the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the first place.

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

private enterprise

Could you please expand?

private sector

Why?

dv said:

How did it happen that conservatives like the_obs ended up so strongly anti-science these days?

It was not always so. It was PM Bruce that founded the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the first place.

I’m not anti science

I’m against compulsory public funding of science.

A bit like I’m against compulsory public funding of media

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

Michael V said:

Could you please expand?

private sector

Why?

Michael, don’t you know that private industry ALWAYS does it better, faster, cheaper, cleaner, brighter, sharper, neater, safer, shinier, snazzier than the public sector. No, Michael, hush, i said ALWAYS.

You only have to look at the wonderful record of Victoria’s ‘privatisation’ of handling calls for emergency assistance to see how marvellous it is.

The_observer said:

dv said:

How did it happen that conservatives like the_obs ended up so strongly anti-science these days?

It was not always so. It was PM Bruce that founded the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the first place.

I’m not anti science

I’m against compulsory public funding of science.

A bit like I’m against compulsory public funding of media

notice how they both cry like babies when public funding is reduced, or even the suggestion of.

captain_spalding said:

Michael V said:

The_observer said:

private sector

Why?

Michael, don’t you know that private industry ALWAYS does it better, faster, cheaper, cleaner, brighter, sharper, neater, safer, shinier, snazzier than the public sector. No, Michael, hush, i said ALWAYS.

You only have to look at the wonderful record of Victoria’s ‘privatisation’ of handling calls for emergency assistance to see how marvellous it is.

Sarcasm?

Reads like it.
—————————-

Me? I hate working for the public sector, and big private sector. Small private sector suits me. Apart from my industry, Australia has little history of significant private research. How do we drive that to change?

Realistically, I don’t think I’ve ever worked at an organisation where at least one third of the staff weren’t thinking of moving on.

.. another religious debate :(

sibeen said:

Realistically, I don’t think I’ve ever worked at an organisation where at least one third of the staff weren’t thinking of moving on.

Hehehehe, six weeks full tac at shoalwater with one shower…

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Hey observer, how about listing all the great achievements of the CSIRO

Hills hoist … LOL

no but, it should be privatised

LIST of CSIRO Achievements

CSIROpedia Achievements by decade

Michael V said:

Apart from my industry, Australia has little history of significant private research. How do we drive that to change?

It’s very hard to do, as the private sector always wants to see an immediate return.

There’s not much room in the private sector for anyone to say “i wonder what causes…” or “what if…”. The first question they’ll be asked is “how does it contribute to the firm’s profits?”.

To answer “well, i don’t know yet, but…” is to end your project long before it could start.

That’s where a ‘pure research’ institution like CSIRO pays off – it can pursue the questions for the private sector has no patience, but the answer to which the private sector will grab and run with to boost their profitability.

Leave research entirely to the private sector, and all you’ll get is last year’s product with a few new buttons on it.

CrazyNeutrino said:

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

Hey observer, how about listing all the great achievements of the CSIRO

Hills hoist … LOL

no but, it should be privatised

LIST of CSIRO Achievements

CSIROpedia Achievements by decade

pretty sure this thread ain’t about achievements.

captain_spalding said:

Michael V said:

Apart from my industry, Australia has little history of significant private research. How do we drive that to change?

It’s very hard to do, as the private sector always wants to see an immediate return.

There’s not much room in the private sector for anyone to say “i wonder what causes…” or “what if…”. The first question they’ll be asked is “how does it contribute to the firm’s profits?”.

To answer “well, i don’t know yet, but…” is to end your project long before it could start.

That’s where a ‘pure research’ institution like CSIRO pays off – it can pursue the questions for the private sector has no patience, but the answer to which the private sector will grab and run with to boost their profitability.

Leave research entirely to the private sector, and all you’ll get is last year’s product with a few new buttons on it.

That’s not the way the new right think. It doesn’t fit the new religion.

captain_spalding said:

Michael V said:

Apart from my industry, Australia has little history of significant private research. How do we drive that to change?

It’s very hard to do, as the private sector always wants to see an immediate return.

There’s not much room in the private sector for anyone to say “i wonder what causes…” or “what if…”. The first question they’ll be asked is “how does it contribute to the firm’s profits?”.

To answer “well, i don’t know yet, but…” is to end your project long before it could start.

That’s where a ‘pure research’ institution like CSIRO pays off – it can pursue the questions for the private sector has no patience, but the answer to which the private sector will grab and run with to boost their profitability.

Leave research entirely to the private sector, and all you’ll get is last year’s product with a few new buttons on it.

the new boss is a venture capitalist

who goes divining in his spare time

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

Air Cargo Scanner

Cattle genome project

Chicken interferon gamma

DHA canola

Ecologically sustainable fisheries and marine industries

HySSIL™ building material

Insulin and epidermal growth factor receptor structures

Murray-Darling Basin Sustainable Yields Project

NovoSorb™ biodegradable polymer

Panoptic™ search engine

Pulsar surveys and the discovery of the double pulsar

QEMSCAN® mineral analysis

Radio astronomy amplifiers using millimetre wavelength imaging

Rainforest frogs study – discovery of chytridiomycosis

Seabed ore systems

Sediment quality assessment frameworks for water ecosystems

SilviScan™ rapid wood analysis

Simulations of marine ecosystems dynamics

UltraBattery™

Water allocation practices

Wireless network (gigabit)
1990

Bacterial drug resistance, gene cassettes and integrons

Dairy products for improved human health

Effluent-irrigated plantations

Elast-Eon™ biocompatible polyurethane

Energy research and development in CSIRO

Entomopathogenic nematodes

Extended wear contact lenses

FLOWERING LOCUS C and its control of the initiation of flowering in plants

Genetically modified cotton varieties

Hendra virus identification

Hydraulic fracturing in mining

Hydrodec – good oil on electricity

Infectious bursal disease virus vaccine

LANDTEM

Low emission vehicles

MIEX® water purification process

Nickel deposits

OPTIM™ fibre processing

Port Phillip Bay Environmental Study

RAFT polymerisation

RNAi

RoadCrack system

Solospun™

Spatial Information Systems

Supercapacitors

Thickener technology for mineral processing

Tuberculosis diagnosis in animals and humans

Wheat breeding in Australia’s high rainfall zone

Wireless LANs

X-ray phase-contrast imaging
1980

Atmospheric dynamics and predictability

AUSSAT-B and other antenna research

Australia Telescope Compact Array

Barrier Reef Image Analysis System (BRIAN)

BCAider

Beta-carotene industry establishment

Ceramic Fuel Cells

Coalscan – on-line analysis instruments for the coal industry

Cotton breeding and new cotton varieties

Engineered performance of timber

Gene shears

Granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor discovery

GrazFeed

Iodine deficiency

Leucaena toxicity solution

Nitroxide-mediated living radical polymerisation

North-West Shelf gas platforms

Polymer banknotes

Potyvirus taxonomy

Regolith geochemistry for mineral exploration

Relenza®

Rust resistance in plants

Salvinia biocontrol

SIROFLO®

Sirospun

Spectacle lens design

Synchro-Pulse Controlled Drop Transfer welding system

Wildlife ecology

Zirconia powders process
1970

Burns injury reductions through improved textile flammabality standards

Cycloprothrin – the first designer insecticide

DELTA taxonomic computer programs

Greenhouse effect and climate change

Influenza virus – how epidemics and pandemics emerge

Interscan aircraft landing system

Objective measurement of wool

Optical fibre nephelometer

Optically Variable Devices

Oxygen sensor (SIRO2)

Remote sensing

SIROFLOC

SiroSmelt

Superconductivity – its contribution to the absolute volt

Tanning waste minimisation processes

Vacuum pump (oil-free) for sophiscated instruments and industries
1960

Antennas for radio telescopes and satellite communications

Cattle for the tropics

Cell membranes and how living organisms resist the cold

Dung beetle program

Mechanised cheese making

Parkes radio telescope and the Apollo 11 moon landing

Prawn fishing industry in the Gulf of Carpentaria

Self-twist yarn

Sirex wasp eradication

Skeleton weed biocontrol

Softly detergent

Transforming the Australian Wine Industry

Wool fibre structure
1950

Atomic absorption spectroscopy

Genetic selection for multiple births in sheep

Measuring the absolute ohm

Myxomatosis to control rabbits

Parkes radio telescope construction

Radio astronomy – observing explosions on the sun

Radio astronomy at Dover Heights

SiroSet

Solar hot water systems

Waterfowl in Australia
1940

Aerogard

Cloud seeding

CSIRAC – Australia’s first computer

Enzyme technology and fellmongering

Gastro-intestinal parasite control of ruminants

Pastures for the north

Radar

Rainforests – Australia’s green cathedrals
1930

Black disease vaccine for sheep

Cobalt deficiency and the cure for coast disease

Contagious bovine pleuropneumonia eradication

Sheep blowfly and other insect pests

Soil Map of Australia
1920

Bitter-pit control

Prickly pear control

captain_spalding said:

Michael V said:

Apart from my industry, Australia has little history of significant private research. How do we drive that to change?

It’s very hard to do, as the private sector always wants to see an immediate return.

There’s not much room in the private sector for anyone to say “i wonder what causes…” or “what if…”. The first question they’ll be asked is “how does it contribute to the firm’s profits?”.

To answer “well, i don’t know yet, but…” is to end your project long before it could start.

That’s where a ‘pure research’ institution like CSIRO pays off – it can pursue the questions for the private sector has no patience, but the answer to which the private sector will grab and run with to boost their profitability.

Leave research entirely to the private sector, and all you’ll get is last year’s product with a few new buttons on it.

In Australia, at least.

In the US (a quite different culture, in many respects, including corporate) they handle private research and private philanthropy quite well.

Mind, I’d prefer a culture without guns, and if that comes bundled with collectively funded research and philanthropy, I’ll take our system, thanks.

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

then get private enterprise to do better than that

CrazyNeutrino said:

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

then get private enterprise to do better than that

But see, many of those things have gone on to private enterprise

dv said:

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

The_observer said:

dv said:

The_observer said:

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

they are mostly happy where they are, and being very productive

CrazyNeutrino said:

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

List of CSIRO Achievements

bit more than the Hills Hoist

2000

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

then get private enterprise to do better than that

“Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

The_observer said:

the new boss is a venture capitalist

who goes divining in his spare time

You’ve got to admire the strategy – if you want something to crash and burn so you can point to the wreckage and say ‘told you so’, you put at the helm someone who’s philosophically opposed to it, and and idiot, to boot.

The_observer said:

dv said:

The_observer said:

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

Well maybe that’s not it at all. Maybe they just don’t want to work for some bloke who is a cross between Dick Smith and Yuri Gellar.

dv said:

The_observer said:

dv said:

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

Well maybe that’s not it at all. Maybe they just don’t want to work for some bloke who is a cross between Dick Smith and Yuri Gellar.

LOL

no but, they cannot complain if the gravy train is running out of steam

The_observer said:

dv said:

The_observer said:

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

dv said:

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

He cannot observe where he’s going

let him fall over the edge

The_observer said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

The_observer said:

again. no one is disagreeing about their achievements

then get private enterprise to do better than that

“Mr Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

Now they have Putin

As an aside, can people restrict thread titles to something less approaching full sentences. Stuffs up formatting.

i did trim it down a bit.

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

dv said:

Yet you seem to want it to close down…

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

I need to get to the very tip of the see-saw,,, to keep things balanced

• i did trim it down a bit.

That’s what Joe said to Tony…

CrazyNeutrino said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

He cannot observe where he’s going

let him fall over the edge

He might find Kingy at the bottom, digging it even deeper.

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

The_observer said:

this thread is pure Abbott hate.

if the bastards are upset that funding has decreased, then go get another job

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

I need to get to the very tip of the see-saw,,, to keep things balanced

Is that another indecent suggestion of yours Observer?

PermeateFree said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

PermeateFree said:

If you go any further to the right Observer, you’ll fall over the edge.

He cannot observe where he’s going

let him fall over the edge

He might find Kingy at the bottom, digging it even deeper.

well I’ll just have to fend for myself down there,, won’t I

The_observer said:

PermeateFree said:

CrazyNeutrino said:

He cannot observe where he’s going

let him fall over the edge

He might find Kingy at the bottom, digging it even deeper.

well I’ll just have to fend for myself down there,, won’t I

I’m sure you would share the shovel.

maybe the staff off the CSIRO could start their own university?

makes sense

did they ever save any money shutting down the SSSF?

the purpose of shutting down the CSIRO is to silence dissent

what you’ll find anyway as time goes on is that you might find LNP supporters being shuffled into these government jobs

they make the place unbearable enough and people move on – then they just shift friends of tony abbot into those positions

wookiemeister said:

did they ever save any money shutting down the SSSF?

the purpose of shutting down the CSIRO is to silence dissent

what you’ll find anyway as time goes on is that you might find LNP supporters being shuffled into these government jobs

they make the place unbearable enough and people move on – then they just shift friends of tony abbot into those positions

Its still on one of the ABC Servers

CrazyNeutrino said:

wookiemeister said:

did they ever save any money shutting down the SSSF?

the purpose of shutting down the CSIRO is to silence dissent

what you’ll find anyway as time goes on is that you might find LNP supporters being shuffled into these government jobs

they make the place unbearable enough and people move on – then they just shift friends of tony abbot into those positions

Its still on one of the ABC Servers

doesn’t function though

if it started up again I doubt if I’d sign up again

ah, time

dv said:

How did it happen that conservatives like the_obs ended up so strongly anti-science these days?

It was not always so. It was PM Bruce that founded the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research in the first place.

I think it’s not so much anti-science as anti-government.

Unthinking acceptance of anything that emanates from Rupert and his mates probably has something to do with it.

Been there, done that.

A colleague of mine, shortly before I quit, made the interesting comment that CSIRO is both the best possible place to work and worst possible place to work. The best possible because, in theory at least, you can research whatever you like for however long you like at whatever pace you like.

The worst possible because it became impossible for any honest person to work there, the funding came to be allocated based on research predictions 18 months in advance and that research schedule had to be strictly adhered to in the following 18 months without deviation, which turns out to be totally impossible for anybody honest, especially as nobody ever got the funding they asked for. In addition, it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO, not just for new expensive items of capital equipment or even just for capital and operating expenses, but also for salary. People ended up being split into five or so separate projects and later being forced into part-time. I reported directly to so many different bosses that I lost count of them. I was once called to task for not reporting progress on a specific project over a period of six months when I had never heard of the project or ever even heard the name of my supposed project leader.

Funding wasn’t the only problem, long before funding became a nightmare came the problem of enforced shut-downs, when staff were forced away from the workplace far too often. And before that we lost all our technical staff – the people who actually built things. You get the picture.

> it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO

PS. That was Howard’s strategy.

mollwollfumble said:

Been there, done that.

A colleague of mine, shortly before I quit, made the interesting comment that CSIRO is both the best possible place to work and worst possible place to work. The best possible because, in theory at least, you can research whatever you like for however long you like at whatever pace you like.

The worst possible because it became impossible for any honest person to work there, the funding came to be allocated based on research predictions 18 months in advance and that research schedule had to be strictly adhered to in the following 18 months without deviation, which turns out to be totally impossible for anybody honest, especially as nobody ever got the funding they asked for. In addition, it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO, not just for new expensive items of capital equipment or even just for capital and operating expenses, but also for salary. People ended up being split into five or so separate projects and later being forced into part-time. I reported directly to so many different bosses that I lost count of them. I was once called to task for not reporting progress on a specific project over a period of six months when I had never heard of the project or ever even heard the name of my supposed project leader.

Funding wasn’t the only problem, long before funding became a nightmare came the problem of enforced shut-downs, when staff were forced away from the workplace far too often. And before that we lost all our technical staff – the people who actually built things. You get the picture.

> it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO

PS. That was Howard’s strategy.

We’ve still got mining to earn us money, science is for eggs heads

I bet Wookie as CSIRO manager could fix it.

Divine Angel said:

I bet Wookie as CSIRO manager could fix it.

He’d have nothing but projects on how to weaponise pop plants

mollwollfumble said:

> it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO

PS. That was Howard’s strategy.

The “plan” was to push R&D towards a model that supported greater levels of industry funding and commercialisation – this is why the whole CRC model was introduced. What we have now is a situation where even the CRCs are being replaced by “Centres of Excellence” for specific (pre-identified) industries.

Cymek said:

Divine Angel said:

I bet Wookie as CSIRO manager could fix it.

He’d have nothing but projects on how to weaponise pop plants

pot plants

Cymek said:

mollwollfumble said:

Been there, done that.

A colleague of mine, shortly before I quit, made the interesting comment that CSIRO is both the best possible place to work and worst possible place to work. The best possible because, in theory at least, you can research whatever you like for however long you like at whatever pace you like.

The worst possible because it became impossible for any honest person to work there, the funding came to be allocated based on research predictions 18 months in advance and that research schedule had to be strictly adhered to in the following 18 months without deviation, which turns out to be totally impossible for anybody honest, especially as nobody ever got the funding they asked for. In addition, it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO, not just for new expensive items of capital equipment or even just for capital and operating expenses, but also for salary. People ended up being split into five or so separate projects and later being forced into part-time. I reported directly to so many different bosses that I lost count of them. I was once called to task for not reporting progress on a specific project over a period of six months when I had never heard of the project or ever even heard the name of my supposed project leader.

Funding wasn’t the only problem, long before funding became a nightmare came the problem of enforced shut-downs, when staff were forced away from the workplace far too often. And before that we lost all our technical staff – the people who actually built things. You get the picture.

> it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO

PS. That was Howard’s strategy.

We’ve still got mining to earn us money, science is for eggs heads

Mining is actually one of the areas where there is the highest levels of industry cooperation/funding for grass roots and applied R&D.

PPS. There has not been a single year since at least the late 1980s in which the yearly funding of CSIRO has more than kept pace with the Consumer Price Index. So in real terms the funding of CSIRO has been continually downward since then.

bump

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

mollwollfumble said:

Been there, done that.

A colleague of mine, shortly before I quit, made the interesting comment that CSIRO is both the best possible place to work and worst possible place to work. The best possible because, in theory at least, you can research whatever you like for however long you like at whatever pace you like.

The worst possible because it became impossible for any honest person to work there, the funding came to be allocated based on research predictions 18 months in advance and that research schedule had to be strictly adhered to in the following 18 months without deviation, which turns out to be totally impossible for anybody honest, especially as nobody ever got the funding they asked for. In addition, it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO, not just for new expensive items of capital equipment or even just for capital and operating expenses, but also for salary. People ended up being split into five or so separate projects and later being forced into part-time. I reported directly to so many different bosses that I lost count of them. I was once called to task for not reporting progress on a specific project over a period of six months when I had never heard of the project or ever even heard the name of my supposed project leader.

Funding wasn’t the only problem, long before funding became a nightmare came the problem of enforced shut-downs, when staff were forced away from the workplace far too often. And before that we lost all our technical staff – the people who actually built things. You get the picture.

> it became policy for every single person in CSIRO to compete against every other person in CSIRO

PS. That was Howard’s strategy.

We’ve still got mining to earn us money, science is for eggs heads

Mining is actually one of the areas where there is the highest levels of industry cooperation/funding for grass roots and applied R&D.

As an exploration geologist, I believe that I was mainly employed as an industry-focussed research scientist.

We (this forum) seem to be the exception to finding science interesting and supporting it, does the general Australian public feel the same I wonder? I think its extremely short sighted to cut funding in the area.

mollwollfumble said:

PPS. There has not been a single year since at least the late 1980s in which the yearly funding of CSIRO has more than kept pace with the Consumer Price Index. So in real terms the funding of CSIRO has been continually downward since then.

that may be true, but it isn’t necessarily indicative of funding directed into the total R&D bucket as a lot of research funding (research grants, post doc salaries and APAs and associated top ups) is recognised outside of the CSIRO.

Michael V said:

diddly-squat said:

Cymek said:

We’ve still got mining to earn us money, science is for eggs heads

Mining is actually one of the areas where there is the highest levels of industry cooperation/funding for grass roots and applied R&D.

As an exploration geologist, I believe that I was mainly employed as an industry-focussed research scientist.

Sure… except that your ‘research’ was targeted towards very specific commercial outcomes 8)

Research projects like the Bowen Basin Super Model that aimed to identify more regional scale targets is probably the more typical sort of geological R&D.

Cymek said:

We (this forum) seem to be the exception to finding science interesting and supporting it, does the general Australian public feel the same I wonder? I think its extremely short sighted to cut funding in the area.

I think that it’s unavoidable that funding into R&D follow the same sorts of economic cycles as are evident in the rest of the economy.

PPPS.

Also, give some thought to the structure of CSIRO.

When I joined, CSIRO had Divisions, Programs and Projects. that was all, apart from Sites.

Under Howard, in addition to Divisions, Programs and Projects, CSIRO top management invented Flagships, Themes and Streams. Then Platforms and only God knows what else. CSIRO has long since passed the point where Divisions all changed their names every year or so. By the time I left, the Chief of Division was holding a weekly briefing for all interested staff on what the new changes to the CSIRO Structure were that WEEK. The number of acronyms we have to use on a daily basis had long since become unknowable, as new management acronyms were invented more often than once a week.

Ah I see

Death by management

It’s an old trick in management to continually expand the paperwork and number of managers, new departments bring new management and of course with the continual and unrelenting “ change” the only people who know how it works are management.

It’s a good way of getting rid of people too, you create a new department , fill it with people then shut that department down

> Death by management

Yes. The management can’t manage, so they hire a set of sub-managers to do their management for them. But, because they can’t manage, they hire the wrong people as sub-managers, so the incompetent sub-managers hire more sub-managers to do their management work for them, etc. Every one manager more is one scientist-technician-support-staff less. In order to keep all these managers busy they are all forced to in-fight for funds for at least six months every year. Instead of a healthy organisation with perhaps eight workers per manager, in CSIRO by the time I left the ratio had reversed with eight managers per worker. I, personally, had at least 10 managers that I had to report directly to, and each of them had 6 or more managers that they had to report directly to, etc.

mollwollfumble said:

> Death by management

Yes. The management can’t manage, so they hire a set of sub-managers to do their management for them. But, because they can’t manage, they hire the wrong people as sub-managers, so the incompetent sub-managers hire more sub-managers to do their management work for them, etc. Every one manager more is one scientist-technician-support-staff less. In order to keep all these managers busy they are all forced to in-fight for funds for at least six months every year. Instead of a healthy organisation with perhaps eight workers per manager, in CSIRO by the time I left the ratio had reversed with eight managers per worker. I, personally, had at least 10 managers that I had to report directly to, and each of them had 6 or more managers that they had to report directly to, etc.

sounds like something from Monty Python……