Friday, November 30, 2012

Age discrimination in pharma discussion

An important discussion on age discrimination in pharma is going on below, if you should choose to join in. 

5 comments:

  1. Hey chemjobber, a friend of mine told me that "jobs are harder than 20 years ago".

    I was about to answer him 'no, they are just harder to get and keep', but now I'm not so sure anymore. If they are harder to keep, that means that they are harder because you have to work more so that you don't get fired, right? Also he was talking about academic jobs, so you might need to know more stuff, keep up with more, and publish a lot more than 20 years ago to get tenure and funding.

    So... do you think it's true? Maybe more true for academia than for industry?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's a good question. I dunno, but we should definitely ask the readership. I feel like that jobs are harder to get and keep because economic growth is much lower, so there's less hiring and more firing. And yes, I feel the same is true for academia in some sense: funding lines are higher, there's more competition, etc., etc.

      I think it's prima facie true for academia, more difficult to grasp for industry, but still probably true.

      Delete
  2. Hey, can someone direct me to (sad/hilarious/shocking but not shocking at all) letter from Caltech from a famous advisor to a postdoc concerning vacation time? Google is not helping me! thanks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. http://www.chemistry-blog.com/2010/06/22/something-deeply-wrong-with-chemistry/

      Enjoy (?).

      Delete