In the Georgia public health laboratory, four of seven technical administrators and just over half of the laboratory’s bench scientists are eligible for retirement within the next five years. If this entire cohort were lost, Director Betty Franko said, “We would be hard pressed to continue our current workload and to maintain current turn-around-times.” There is no one in line to replace Franko, should she vacate her position.
The New York City public health laboratory—which conducted a significant chunk of the nation’s anthrax testing in 2001—has lost a quarter of its staff to retirement since 2002. Within the next five years, almost 30% of those remaining will be eligible to retire.
The Missouri public health laboratory is well into the second year of a search for a new director, as the current director, Eric Blank, nears retirement. Said Blank, “We’ve made a real push in last six to eight months. Right now, we’re between a rock and a hard place.” In the worst case scenario, the laboratory will not be allowed to operate without a director who meets federal regulatory requirements. Basic public health services, such as newborn screening, would then be in jeopardy.
Other states and localities are in similar straits.
Pandora Ray, director of APHL’s National Center for Public Health Laboratory Leadership (NCPHLL), said several factors have exacerbated the workforce shortage in the public sector: non-competitive salaries, a general lack of awareness of public health laboratories and what they do, and lack of formal educational programs in laboratory science.
APHL’s NCPHLL is working to address all of these challenges. Among its activities are:
• Survey research to document current and anticipated worker shortfalls, job classifications and required competencies and innovative recruitment practices.
• Documentation of regional scientist salaries so that public health laboratories can make a sound case for raising non-competitive wages.
• A mentoring program to help emerging public health laboratory leaders enhance their leadership skills.
• Marketing training to help laboratory staff “tell the public health laboratory story” to cohorts of newly trained scientists as well as students deciding on a course of study.
• Succession planning seminars and tools.
• Regional forums of laboratory leaders to devise additional strategies.
Said Ray, “Our job is two-pronged: to find, attract and keep potential public health laboratory leaders in the pipeline and to work with those already in the system to develop leadership skills. We’re trying to communicate the excitement, passion and enthusiasm people have for public health laboratory work. When you think about the great public health challenges of the day—things like avian influenza and XDR-TB—you realize that public health laboratory scientists really do make a difference every day.”