I haven't tried finding a post-doc yet but I thought the best way to find a post-doc is networking. Most of of the post-docs I know, knew the post-doc supervisor in some way beforehand. Either via recommendation or meeting a conference. I know my supervisors don't advertise post-docs and if they don't know anyone, they reach out to their network for a recommendation. I know this isn't useful but maybe reach out through any network you have or your supervisors.

I agree with pm133.

I have been in your position. I spent over 6 months working with a piece of equipment that would turn off randomly 2-3 times a day and then need to be re-calibrated which would take over an hour each time. I eventually find that there was a loose data cable port (not the cable but the port!) which could be fixed with a little bit of duct tape. I also have been trying to adapt another experiment to a smaller scale for about 4-5 months and have absolutely no results. If I ever scale it down, it will be an instant paper. I think I have also broken about £2,500 worth of equipment over two years by trying new methods and got told "if you don't break anything you aren't in the lab enough". I bet you can find hundreds of stories of far worse experimental horror stories.

What I am trying to say is that everyone has experimental problems and don't take it as a personal failure.

It is not the greatest of places to live but people generally exaggerate crime. You won't get attacked in the streets and the surroundings are rather dull but it is still in a first world country. You can travel on weekends to nicer places and leave after your PhD.

Experience: Visited Middlesborough once

Not an expert in social sciences and don't understand your problem. But are you doing something similar to a review paper? If you are doing a review the methods would something like systemic or meta analysis.

Congratulations!

1-2 month long waits are common in these scenarios and emailing them doesn't speed anything up.

If you want to email, I would politely ask when you should expect a final decision as you need to make plans.

I am not actually sure what to say but I do feel my point still stands. Your have graduated, your PhDs are over and all that stuff is behind. If you worked in a bad company with a bad boss but left the company, you do not continue to complain to that boss. Closure is a hard thing but it does let you move on with your life.

During my placement year I had a really shit boss (made me hate industry for a while) but he was a nice person. When my placement was nearly over, we had a long candid talk/meeting about what we thought went wrong. We both admitted that we weren't perfect and I think we both learnt a lot, just by talking about both our mistakes. Nothing went down on paper and no blame was assigned. That is what I think is a constructive professional way of improving things. Not an adversarial format like a formal complaint.

I understand that you want to prevent it happening in the same thing happening to other people in the future. But formal complaints are a huge amount of paperwork that is all on record and can affect the supervisor/ university for years to come. Making the complaint known and letting the complaint be dealt with internally is the best course of action unless you have enough to go court. You only win internal procedures if you have enough to win in court.

Again if you haven't graduated or passed, I completely support you in any university procedure.

They shouldn't be discriminating against you for mental health problems and if they thought you did have MH problems they have a duty of care to work with you in a constructive manner. Did you ever tell them you had problems or did they guess it?

Though if you did ask them for "military-like personal abuse" they can use that against you.

So you think you can hold an organisation to account by complaining to the same organisation?

You are right, the safest time to complain is when you leave because you have nothing to lose or to gain. I have a lot more sympathy for people suffering under supervisors before they have finished because they have so much to lose. But once you gain the PhD, you have nothing to lose and the supervisor has everything to lose. I respect that you are trying to prevent someone having a similar situation but seeking a punishment, is vengeance. If the war on drugs has proven anything, it is that rehabilitation is far better than punishment, therefore being constructive should be the first option.

Again if you haven't graduated, I completely support you in any university procedure.

Talk with your supervisor and just be polite and honest about your concerns.

On a side note, it sounds like Sam is taking initiative and you aren't. Nobody gives you anything if you don't ask. You have the data so why don't you write a draft paper? You don't need permission to ask to do something and it is easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

Seriously what are you trying to achieve? You have graduated and can move on with your life. The supervisors may have been horrific but you you did graduate and that is what really matters in the end. Nothing good comes from vengeance.

People change there research area all the time. As long is it is in the same field and you have some transferable skills, it is usually okay.

Picking advisors is difficult but there are a lot more good supervisors than bad (thi forum only displays the worst) . I wouldn't worry unless there are red flags at the application stage, at which point trusting your gut is right.

When choosing your PhD, location is important but not everything. I personally think that choosing the right project that you can spend three years working on is the most important decision. Though where ever you choose there will be some university society and some form of postgraduate community. With a little bit of effort you can find friends just about anywhere during a PhD, as there are other people in a similar position.

That does sound complicated and awkward. If there is no more funding and you don't like the work, quitting is the right option. I would continue until the end of the funding and wrap up the project as best as possible, as to not burn any bridges.

I don't think this will hurt your chances too much if you focus on the positive aspects. Your project funding ran out, you didn't fail but your funding ran out. That is a legitimate excuse. But you also worked in industry and hopefully you can achieve a masters from the work. That actually looks okay but I may be wrong.

Are there any postdocs in your department you can talk with? Or can you ask your supervisor about funding opportunities or how to organise one? Talking with people in your department will probably get you the best advice.

Has your 2nd supervisor already left? If not ask them to suggest a replacement or see if they can continue supervising you anyway. My second supervisor has recently left and she suggested a replacement but we agreed that she would supervise via email. Most of our conversations were via email anyway, so her moving to another uni wasn't that bad.