|If this is your attitude towards computers (like mine),|
you shouldn't be a computational chemist.
Photo credit: liberaldoomsayer.blogspot.com
In the environments I've worked in, there are traditionally a lot fewer computational folks than there are traditional synthetic chemists. (With the advent of the designer/synthesizer model that Derek Lowe was posting about yesterday, of course, that might change.) If I were a manager, I might be tempted to pay a computational chemist slightly more than a bench to attract a really good experienced modeler. It's not going to cost you that much more, and their results are going to be driving your science (if you let it.) They also serve, those who stand and compute.
On the other hand, there sure are a lot of computational chemists out there, and supply-and-demand does drive these discussions.
In other salary talk =, how much of a salary discount should you expect for working for a start-up versus an established company? (Have you ever noticed that a lot of small companies will refer to themselves as a start-up during salary negotiations, even though they've been around for 10 years?)
Readers, you know the answers. Please comment freely.