next »

[k2323]

I posted a while back about my PI not being happy about me being PI on a grant with some collaborators from another institution. I’m in the UK, and when I met with the potential collaborators, they said it would be a project grant to the Wellcome Trust, I would get a full-time MS-level person to supervise based at my uni, and I’d be putting in 10% of my time (and thus paid 10% of my salary from the grant).

I went ahead with the preliminary application for the grant after my PI rather begrudgingly said it was ok. I just found out that the main PI on the grant (my potential collaborator) submitted the preliminary application as an Intermediate Clinical Fellowship for himself, without consulting me nor telling me. Not as a project grant. Apparently the WT has given him a positive response and is now asking for the full application/grant. This means 1. I will be sharing a postdoc with another of the PIs and the postdoc will not be based at my uni and 2. I will not be paid as part of my salary. Instead, the main PI is suggesting I get paid as some sort of lump sum for services – which makes it consulting. I already do too much consulting and do not have the time to do this in my ‘spare time’ – and I’m a bit miffed that he decided to do something completely different than what we decided and did not inform me.

Now I have to make a decision. The main PI says that if this Fellowship doesn’t go through he’ll submit it as a grant as we had previously agreed. I am only interested in being part of it if it’s what we had previously agreed. Unless being on someone else’s Fellowship as a consultant will help my career any – and I don’t see how it would. I also don’t see how we can get the work done I proposed with a half-time non-specialist postdoc who is not based at my uni.

I also know this grant is no different than previously submitted ones that have not been funded because the stats were weak. And now it’s got a positive response. If I withdraw (I am the stats person) I’ll tank this guy’s application.

Argh. Any suggestions? So far I've gotten great advice on here - and my PI isn't much of a mentor. And I need to give him a response by the end of the week...

K

[sciencephd]

I'm not sure what to suggest, other than don't trust this clown.  It would be easy to suggest pulling out and not working with him, but if you want the money, that's not feasible.

Depending on the nature of the work, I would usually, however, prefer a 1/2 time postdoc to a technician.  Of course, it is not likely that you would get 1/2, given the the PI collaborator is clearly a rat.

OK, I read your post again, and I think I would give him one last chance to kill the clinical fellowship.  If he doesn't I say cease all dealings with him.  If you are listed on the fellowship in any way, pull out, and send an email to the granting agency making it clear that you a no longer participating in the app.  If he stuck you into the clinical fellowship as a consultant, without your knowlege that he was changing the grant type, that is a very clear ETHICAL BREACH.

[k2323]

Thanks sciencephd, that is exactly my gut reaction to it.

I already consult with my former lab at NIH 5-15 hours a week (and am paid well to do so, and I have a renewable yearly contract) and so I really have no time to do extra consulting.  Of course, since they pay me well, I also do not need the money.

I just sent him this:

Dear (potential rat),

I thought we had agreed to put this forward as a project grant, with me putting in some salaried time.  Now it seems you have changed it, unless I've misunderstood.

If what you are now proposing is a consultant/contractor type agreement, I would have informed you that I cannot be a consultant and do this work in my spare time.  I already consult with an NIH group and it is a long term ongoing partnership, between 5-15 hours a week, with a year-long renewable contract.  I just do not have additional time for more consulting work.  I also will need a full-time person to do the methods development I am proposing.

So, unless I have misunderstood you or the funding issues, I do not really know what else to tell you.  The funding as we originally agreed would give me protected time to work on your study and a full-time person to help with the implementation.  But, the way I see it now, it would interfere with my current contractual obligations and probably not provide me the support I will need. Please advise if you see it a different way or if I've not gotten the funding issues clearly.

Thanks,
K

[k2323]

Dr. Rat claims that he didn't know about the Fellowship when we met and the WT suggested to him that he apply for that instead of the project grant as the Fellowship is more likely to be successful.  Of course, none of this matters in that he just did not tell me what was going on, which is his fault.

Well, it's egg on his face if I pull out.  He should have asked before putting my work forward for this.

He now says he's working closely with the WT to see if I can be funded as we previously agreed.  Two emails ago, he said that the main difference between the Fellowship and the project grant is that with the Fellowship he would only be able to pay his own salary and that of a single postdoc.

I'm going to tell him it's not really about the funding, but instead about me being funded on a project grant as a PI vs. as a collaborator of some kind on his Fellowship.

Argh.  I am so sick of slimy, stab-you-in-the-back collaborators and colleagues!

How can I be sure - if I email the WT - that he's removed my stats section (which has a lot of methods development which a very small number of other people in the UK are qualified to do)?  If he's this sleazy, then he might leave it in and just put some other stats person's name on there.  Or am I screwed and he can take my ideas and use them to get funded (then never do the methods development)?

K

[sciencephd]

Argh.  I am so sick of slimy, stab-you-in-the-back collaborators and colleagues!

So am I.  Unfortunately, in my world it it pretty much the default.

How can I be sure - if I email the WT - that he's removed my stats section (which has a lot of methods development which a very small number of other people in the UK are qualified to do)?  If he's this sleazy, then he might leave it in and just put some other stats person's name on there.  Or am I screwed and he can take my ideas and use them to get funded (then never do the methods development)?

K

I think that you are going to just let him have the methods section, as there is really no way to police this, nor is it worth your time. 

Another option is say nothing to the granting organization, take some of the consulting money if he gets funding as a fellowship, do nothing for 6 months, and then pull out.  You could simply claim to the granting agency that you did not agree to being on the grant.  Obviously this is more tricky, but if you really want to manipulate the situation, this may be an option.

[jackit]

Hi K2323 -

Your previous email was perfect.  But I would clarify to Rat that you are not willing to be on the project unless you are PI (is that the right terminology?) of your section with a full time person based with you.

Cutting a grant down to a fellowship is always bound to reduce the scope and feasibility.  Although Rat should have talked to you earlier, this one is really on the Wellcome Trust people, for expecting that similar work could be done for far less support (or maybe Rat actually suggested it?).

I agree with SciPhi that you should not worry about what Rat does with the writeup after you take your name off the application -- any decent program manager would nail him for leaving the stats section alone after saying you previously produced the analysis.

This also eliminates an irritant between you and your current mentor.  So there's the silver lining...