Concerns Over ISRO’s Ability to Attract Top Engineering Talent

A recent 2023 interview with former ISRO Chairperson S Somanath has gained significant attention, highlighting worries about India’s capability to keep its leading engineering talent within the public sector. Somanath indicated that close to 60% of students from prestigious institutions like the Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs) exited an ISRO recruitment event upon learning about the organisation’s salary framework.

Somanath explained, “The team was outlining career opportunities. After detailing the job prospects and nature of the work, they revealed the salary structure within ISRO. The students present realised the highest salary they could expect from ISRO, and that was the turning point. Following the presentation, 60 per cent of attendees left.” He noted that despite being regarded as among the nation’s elite, merely about 1% of IIT graduates opt to join ISRO.

These statements have triggered renewed discussions regarding the compensation for engineers and scientists in India, especially in public research institutions. Critics have asserted that ISRO struggles to attract high-calibre talent due to uncompetitive remuneration, even with its essential role in advancing India’s space objectives.

The interview also reignited a related issue dubbed “bond bias.” This refers to the mandatory service bonds that healthcare graduates must fulfil, while engineering alumni from publicly funded institutions like IITs and IIMs do not carry such requirements.

Medical professionals, including cardiologist Dr Deepak Krishnamurthy, expressed their opinions on social platforms, advocating for fairness. He remarked, “It is puzzling why only doctors face bond requirements for government work. Such rules should also apply to IIT graduates for positions at ISRO, DRDO, and other similar entities.”

Another doctor commented on the disparity, stating, “In various states, doctors face bonds lasting up to a decade after completing their MBBS, MD, or super-specialty training. Why are engineers exempted when they also receive considerable funding?”

Public reaction online was mixed. Some users supported the idea of mandatory public service for graduates from government-supported institutions, arguing that taxpayer funds should come with a commitment to public service. One individual remarked, “The government invests over ₹11,000 crore in IITs. Graduates from these institutions should be compelled to serve in the public sector for several years.”

Conversely, others highlighted ISRO’s outdated wage policies. A former student who was offered a 10-month internship with ISRO described the experience as requiring relocation, foregoing placements, and lacking any stipend or job security. “This situation is nearly exploitative for students. A modest stipend of 15K/month could address this issue,” they noted.

Another social media user encapsulated the challenge by stating, “High salaries attract the best talent. While the nation requires skilled professionals, it does not demand that they give up lucrative job opportunities. Other nations incentivise their top talent with competitive salaries. Why should India, now the third-largest economy, not do the same?”

As ISRO continues to assume a prominent role in India’s global technological and space pursuits, the pressing question remains whether it and other public institutions can adapt rapidly enough to retain the essential talent needed for future success.