Why they do not trust us??

Actually the EC funds permanent positions in tenure - these are those at the JRC. Just that for example for the non permanent ones for which there were EPSO competitions this year it was written that for example the necessary for Quantitative Sciences (my field) will be 180/year and we were a list of 540/3 years so everybody should get something, but in fact since September when the results were given there were about 10 positions in all fields together, and me and others who are even grantholders there were told that there are cuts everywhere and that they do not take people from the lists. So I am wondering if the competition was not just done to show what was said in the title "EU needs postdoctoral researchers". I mean, I am not in a hurry, I have a permanent position so can go also later, but I know others in permanent positions who applied and do not want to come back because salaries in Romania are just so miserable. This is also why mobility is not valued here, as people expect one to leave. The fate makes that in the bus from the airport when coming to the MCAA meeting I sat near the mother of a Romanian participant to Voice of the Researchers who of course wants to support her daughter to stay abroad, and not to come back to Romania. As I also said in the interview one returning to Romania is regarded as one who failed to remain in the "West" for better life. Even after one month stay. I was twice one month in Portugal last year and already asked in Romania if they did not make me an offer for longer time. But people do not understand the limitedness of jobs abroad - the last colleague of mine in Germany who was still there from the time I was there became 46 last year and on his birthday it was the last day he worked because he reached the upper limit he can work on determined time contracts, and, although he won a project, he cannot be employed on that because the university is afraid that he will claim to get a permanent position (according to the law). So would I have stayed there now I would be unemployed as well, and in Romania now positions are of course much more difficult to get than 6 years ago, I've got almost the last train.

Hello Mike,
yes I was talking about the Voice of the Researcher conference.
I do not know if you where there the first day during my pitch, my slam, and during the working group discussion, probably not, so I can tell you that I´m mobile from 11 years ago, I have changed 4 countries, 6 ciities and 8 institutes and that I really like geographycal mobility. I think that the mobility is a big opportunity for learning, networking, collaborating and being open mind. During the working groups I also (and I was the only one) supported the idea that the mobility should be "practiced" not just by young researchers, but also by aged professors. So you see that this is not the issue. What I mean is not geographycal and/or inter-disciplinary mobility which I think are really good, but the economic/scientific mobility. If I have e permanent job and I´m evaluated on the way (every year, let´s say), something like tenure track as you wrote, I get sufficient stability for doing my job very well and not wasting my time in other stuff (as looking for new jobs) but this does not mean that I can´t physically move! Even with a permanent position you can ask the people to move and improve their knowledge, this is for example as it works in Denmark: you get your position, you are not forced to move, but strongly suggested and supported to do it and everybody does it.
I know that there are many people that would like to be funded without moving from their chair, but this is not the case. If you evaluate the research really often basing the evaluation also in the geographic mobility you avoid to fund people stuck on their chair, but you also support who is working well.

And talking about career around a science - another bad investment side of my Marie Curie fellowships is that they trained me in earthquake engineering. I am really good in this now, much better than in other fields, but I am not paid for it. It doesn't mean that I don't do high quality work: I am doing courses voluntarily, I am consuting well paid project, but I am not paid. On the other hand, I have a permanent position and paid job for what I learned in university before the training by research (actually also the German DFG funded my earthquake engineering training), in which I am less good, and the works I have to do not so high level, but because I have a diploma in it it is recognised. The MC experience, because it leads to no diploma, is thus less recognised also for future jobs, not only for joining alumni associations. This is probably why the ITNs were better in the survey than the individual fellowships. It is the doctorate itself as degree which is recognised, not the kind of fellowship which led to it, in my oppinion.

Actually my doctorate father in Germany explained us how it is with the limited time jobs: there are more researchers than positions, for which reason they cannot stay permanently at the institution, they have to leave for a while to industry and so to make place for the others, so they can also benefit from a university position at some point in their life (not permanently of course everybody). It is practice in Germany that people are employed at universities while doing their doctorate, then go to industry, and come back later when they are professors (if they come back at all). The criterion to be professor is the industry, not the mobility experience, but industry might oblige also for going abroad, through the specifics of their international direction (my doctoral father was 20 years in Arab countries, for example). In other countries this does not work, because the stay in industry makes of course a very thin publication list, so at some point when my publication list was longer than that of my professor I was thrown out (it was told to me to liberate the desk - payment I did not have since more than one year, but I was allowed to use the office and had further a visa on my savings).
It is not my case, though, to go to industry, because, as I also talked at the GA about the necessity to get your diplomas recognised in your home country in Hungary, in Romania it is necessary not only for academia, but also for industry. And because my German diploma was not recognised in time, I do not have now the right to be member of the architect chamber and practice. I would need now to compile with certain additional conditions which take 2 years of time if I find an office. This is of course also one backside of mobility.

I am sorry for you Riccardo, I have observed you since the meeting and all the posts as well as the comments.. I think you probably have unmet needs toward the groups, however I am not liking your always thinking so negatively like when you say "Why do they not trust us?". Even Presidents have their periods for few years and they need to demonstrate very hard in order to get trust of people for Few years. So what we are that they trust for a long-term funding? What are you talking about "The procedure is not effective at all" ??? I can not believe that you have received the funding from the Action and you say such things. Please think about this: Even your parents raise you until some certain time only. For me, I do not agree with you saying so, and as far as I understand, it is a program to promote young researcher in their carreers and to promote international collaborations in doing research/sciences, it is Not something that provide long-term fundings because the funds are limited and there are more people waiting to get the funds for their carreers as well.