Scientists issue a stark warning to the government about challenges faced by researchers in early stages of their careers

One year ago today, I was trapped in the offices of the Campaign for Science and Engineering on the University College London campus with about a dozen other people, getting high on spray glue.

It wasn't some geeky start-of-term blow-out – we had gathered to make hundreds of placards ahead of the Science is Vital rally, a protest aimed at persuading the government to stave off swingeing cuts to the science budget.

In just over a month, our hastily assembled grassroots operation had raised 33,000 signatures on a petition, summoned more than 2,000 people to a noisy rally right outside the Treasury, and organised a packed lobby of MPs in Parliament. The outcome – a cash freeze settlement for the science budget – was far better than we'd hoped, though it was still clear to scientists that harder times lay ahead.

A year on, as inflation eats away the value of current funding, we're still only feeling the beginning of a long winter.

UK scientists have mustered again today in response to the threat to science. This time we aren't dressed in white coats and thronging the streets; the protest is quieter and more measured, but there is the same sense of purpose and determination underneath.

What is at stake? Science has always been a tough profession. The hours are long, the pay is relatively poor for the education and training required (usually about a decade), and permanent positions are scarce. Most research worldwide is fuelled by a vast legion of enthusiastic, talented younger scientists – PhD students and postdocs who work on a string of short-term contracts.

Most will be forced to leave the profession because there is no place for them. The structure is often likened to a pyramid, but in reality, with its absence of mid-level permanent positions, it's more like a spike on a vast flat plane.

What's more, almost uniquely among modern professionals, many scientists find that experience counts against them as they get older and become more expensive to retain on cash-limited contracts. The present system is extraordinarily wasteful.

Increasingly, the sense I get when I listen to researchers talk is that the system has let them down. But without their dedication and sacrifice, science would grind to a halt – and all its economic and societal benefits along with it. Morale in UK science seems to have hit an all-time low.

In May, Science is Vital organised a meeting at the Royal Institution to explore the idea that the science career structure is broken. David Willetts, Minister of State for Universities and Science, was on the panel and participated with gusto. Nothwithstanding the Haldane Principle (the idea that the scientific community and not politicians should decide how research funding is spent), Mr Willetts agreed that the government should facilitate further discussion of our issues at a higher level. To this end, he asked us to summarise the findings and send them his way.

But we wanted to have a broader consultation than had been possible that evening. So at summer's end, we asked scientists to submit their verdicts on the viability of the science career structure and to offer ideas for improvement.

The response was overwhelming. Within 24 hours, we were inundated with written submissions, and by the end, we had nearly 700. These issued from over 160 institutions in all four nations in the UK, from people across the range of the community – from undergrads at one end all the way to fellows of the Royal Society at the other.

The message was loud and consistently clear: nearly 70% expressed concern about the career structure and opportunities for early to mid-stage researchers. Compounded by other issues such as low pay, enforced mobility and clashes with family life, the broken career structure is seen as a major fault-line which, if not addressed, will endanger UK science.

This comes at a time we can ill afford weakness: a healthy science base is crucial for our economy and for addressing the technological problems currently faced by our planet, such as climate change, global pandemics and food security.

Today, we present our final report – Careering out of Control: A Crisis in the UK Science Profession? (summary here) – to the online community of British scientists and to Mr Willetts in person. We fervently hope that the nationwide alarm of scientists about the broken career structure, voiced eloquently in our report by people at all levels of the profession, will rekindle the discussion brought up by Sir Gareth Roberts in his famous SET for Success report in 2002.

Many of the concerns Roberts identified remain outstanding, and require urgent scrutiny by government, funding agencies and scientists. In particular, we hope that junior researchers, the very people whose dedication sustains and enriches UK science, will be included in these discussions.

Dr Jennifer Rohn is a cell biologist at University College London and founder and chair of Science is Vital