Let’s not pass down the pain we endured as early career researchers

This article reflects on how academic career “success stories” can quietly legitimise unhealthy expectations for early-career researchers (ECRs). Drawing on an anecdote from a career-development event and the author’s own experience of sustaining research productivity alongside an extreme teaching load, it argues that pride in personal resilience can obscure the structural normalisation of overwork in precarious academic labour markets. The piece critiques the tendency to infer fairness from survival, noting that intense competition, shrinking funding, and limited pathways have escalated output expectations—often at the expense of wellbeing and equity, particularly for those with caring responsibilities or heavier teaching commitments. It then proposes practical steps that established academics and selection committees can take to disrupt the “arms race”: assessing achievements relative to opportunity, prioritising genuinely early-career entrants for entry-level roles, and limiting the number of research outputs considered to shift attention from quantity to quality. While not a complete solution, these measures could help rebalance incentives, reduce exploitation, and foster a healthier professional culture. The article concludes that those who have endured the system should use their influence to change it—so that ECRs can flourish without inheriting the pain of their predecessors.