[QUOTE=I’m Ron Burgundy?]
I hate this sort of BS budgeting. I got this same lame excuse from my uni.
Say an office usually spends $10 a year on salaries, $10 a year on computers and $5 a year on supplies. Not realistic, whatever. $25 total. Salaries 40%, computers 40%, supplies 20%.
This year, the office comes up short in its budget one year and has only $20. Following the percentages, $8 goes to salaries, $8 goes to computers and $4 to supplies. An investor shows up with $4, but says you can only spend it on computers.
Here’s how a university handles this situation:
$8 to Salaries, $12 to computers, $4 to supplies. Someone gets fired, supplies are mised, and computers are upgraded.
Any idiot would cut the preallocated computer budget and spend the unrestricted funds elsewhere, while still using the investor’s money on its restricted target.
Large universities are festering piles of bureaucracy running rampant with waste. For every raise in tuition there’s some massive frivolity that no one needs and few students use or even know about.
[/QUOTE]
I won’t argue that university administrations aren’t festering piles of bureaucracy. The OP says she was research staff, though, and that’s not the same as being a regular U employee… so what you wrote above in all probability doesn’t apply in her case.
Far and away the most common situation is that research staff salaries are paid by outside grants that are administered by the U, so when the research grant money is gone, so is the job. No amount of wishing that $$$ would get transferred from the U’s billion+ dollar endowment, say, is going to keep you employed once the grant is spent.
People don’t realize it, but being a “soft money” (grant supported) researcher is essentially like being self employed: you (the PI) have to keep a continual stream of new project money coming in, or you (and the rest of the group you’re supporting - post-docs, grad students, technicians, programmers, etc.) won’t get paid. The U is there mostly to give you a place to hang your hat and to deal with the financial guff associated with administering gov’t money, and that’s it.