Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

94. To ask the Minister for Education and Skills if he will engage with PhD researcher unions (details supplied) to ensure that all PhD research students receive a living wage income or above via their stipend; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [59820/22]

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister engage with PhD researchers' unions to ensure that all PhD students receive a living wage income and that they are treated as workers?

The truth is that they are well below the minimum wage. The highest available PhD stipends are €18,500 over a 40-hour week. Most of them do significantly more than that, which works out at less than €9 per hour.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for the question. He is aware of the short-term benefits, introduced in the budget in terms of one-off payments or increases to the stipend baseline, so I will not waste time on that. I accept we need to do more. We need to retain talent in Ireland and we need to attract talent to Ireland. I have engaged with many PhD students and postgraduate students, and as recently as yesterday I met a group of researchers with disabilities led by Dr. Vivian Rath.

The key thing we need to do is to have a proper evidence-based review of the stipend and the income supports, but also how they are classified in terms of the balance of students versus employees. I agree that question needs to be settled. I had an interesting discussion with a group of PhD researchers who referenced countries that have good practice for PhD researchers, some of whom are treated as students and some of whom are classified as employees, so it would be interesting to see the evidence on that and how it pans out.

I have decided that the review will be external and I have appointed two external co-chairs, Dr. Andrea Johnson and David Cagney. The scope of the review, as I said, is quite broad. It will look at current PhD researcher supports, including financial supports, stipends, SUSI supports and other supports. It will look at the adequacy, consistency and equity of current arrangements across research funders and higher education institutions, including equity and welfare considerations, at the status of PhD researchers, student or employee, including a review of international comparators and models, and at graduate outcomes. It will also look at visa requirements and duration for non-EU students, which I am coming across as a real issue for many students researchers and their families. The review will be informed by a robust evidence base and will be completed in 2023. The first job of the review will be to engage directly with PhD researchers and I will make sure, as a result of the Deputy's question, that the unions and alliances he has referenced hear from the co-chairs.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The issue of treating PhD students as workers is the central issue because what flows from it is that, if we recognise them as employees, then they have to be paid at least the minimum wage. They are workers in terms of the research work they do but also, in very many cases, in the context of the unpaid work the do in delivering tutorials, demonstrations, correcting assignments and exams, and even lecturing. In very many cases, a condition for getting PhD scholarships to cover their fees is that they have to do this teaching. The truth is that universities have become increasingly reliant on this unpaid and low paid labour over the past decades, and PhDs have been particularly badly hit. That is why a key demand of the Postgraduate Workers Alliance and the PhDs’ Collective Action Union is for worker status for PhDs. It would address the major issues with pay and change immigration status for many non-EU PhDs, giving them a greater right to travel. It would also allow them to engage in collective bargaining.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The status issue that the Deputy has outlined will be considered. It is an explicit term of the terms of reference. What I would also flag to the Deputy, as I flagged earlier, is that in this House we will have an opportunity in 2023 to pass a research Bill. The Government has committed to bringing forward a stand-alone national research Bill in 2023. This will be the Bill to give effect to many of the provisions of Impact 2030, including the creation of one new agency for funding research in Ireland, but will also perhaps give an opportunity to look at scientific advisory structures and, therefore, it will give an opportunity to deal with any of the recommendations that flow from the review as well.

I would encourage the organisations and groups the Deputy is referencing to engage with the reviewers, as I know they will. It will be open to public consultation but there will also be specific stakeholder engagement. I will make sure the Deputy is aware of how that is going to work in terms of the process. We will be led by the evidence that the review produces.

Paul Murphy (Dublin South West, RISE)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Ireland compares badly with its EU peers in terms of how PhD workers are treated. I listed the kind of stipends at the high end and, obviously, there are many on less than that, but the EU average for a PhD pay is €32,100, and pay in Nordic countries starts at about €50,000 and progresses to €55,000 on a fixed-term four-year contract. Separate from the issue of treatment as workers and the issue of pay that relate to it are a series of other issues that the PhD workers unions are raising, such as ending discrimination against non-EU PhD researchers, clear information about welfare and housing support entitlements for PhD researchers, allocation of affordable HEI-owned student accommodation for postgraduates proportionate to the HEI postgraduate population, an end to precarity in higher education and research and improved access and support for all who wish to pursue postgraduate research and teaching positions, including a dramatic increase in funding for disability services.

Rose Conway-Walsh (Mayo, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is never too late to do the right thing. I very much welcome the review and the legislation that the Minister is proposing around this and I hope it will fix what has been broken for a long time, in particular on an individual level in terms of pushing PhD researchers into poverty. I have met so many PhD researchers over the last couple of years. They are the most modest, frugal people in probably the whole of the population. Given the valuable work they do on climate change, public health and so many other issues that we need addressed across the country, they are vital to our present and to our future. Every day, we hear of new innovations and new revelations that are being made, and they are being made on the basis of the very hard work that is done by these PhD researchers. I take on board what the Minister is saying on the terms of reference and how this is going to be scoped. I ask him to sit down, as others have, with the unions to make sure we capture everything and that we get it right this time. I ask when that review will be finished and when the legislation will come in. The Minister knows that legislation often comes into this House and that it then takes ages to complete. The Opposition will work with the Minister to make sure it is expedited.

Simon Harris (Wicklow, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I always welcome others working with me. This legislation will have to go through pre-legislative scrutiny. It is the Government’s intention to publish legislation early in 2023 and then, to be truthful, we will be in the hands of the joint committee in terms of pre-legislative scrutiny. That pre-legislative scrutiny will be very important. Ministers often ask for it to be waived for good reasons but, on this occasion, I think pre-legislative scrutiny will be important to give voice and an opportunity for a number of these stakeholders to outline their views. We need to get this legislation right. I hope we can pass the legislation together in 2023 and I hope we can begin the process early in 2023, and that is my honest take on it.

Deputy Paul Murphy outlined a range of issues that clearly highlight the need for a national review. I do not think it is as easy as the stipend, although I accept there is a need to do more on the stipend. The breadth of the issues is quite significant. We have to get this right. I accept more needs to be done and we need a robust evidence base as to how to proceed. I would very much welcome the engagement of this House on the review.