Reacción a "Reactions to the adoption of the new Science Law "

In general terms, it seems to me that, although there are still some important aspects that need attention and that the Science Law that has been approved does not yet resolve, this law makes a positive contribution and a significant improvement in some necessary aspects. For example, it seems to me that it was very necessary to address the working conditions of staff working in research, which until now have been unsustainable and unfair compared to those of workers in any other field. In my opinion, this still needs to be developed further, for example, to adapt the working conditions of all types of workers, including those of technicians and support staff, which are essential for quality research, or to update the ridiculously low salaries of research staff in Spain, without comparison with those of equivalent positions in other European countries, which greatly hinders the competitive incorporation of research talent in our laboratories.  

Along these lines, I consider it very important that Amendment 76, which was introduced during the passage of the law through the Senate and which introduced different treatment for people contracted for European projects, has not been consolidated. The very fact that workers could be treated differently depending on the source of the funds with which they are contracted seems to me to be aberrant and unsustainable because of the injustices it would introduce in laboratories.   

I believe that the change in working conditions will be good for the health of our laboratories. I sincerely believe so, although it is true that it will force us to adjust the way we manage contracts and the dynamics of research that is too subject to changing conditions - another fundamental problem of our science that, unfortunately, I do not think the law will change unless it also introduces a very significant increase in R&D funding - and also in terms of access to resources. A few years ago we also went through tensions and furious debates about whether or not it was appropriate for the research system to replace grants for younger researchers with contracts, and I don't think there is anyone today who questions that this change was made in the right direction.