1. HELPING CHEMISTS FIND JOBS IN A TOUGH MARKET. 2. TOWARDS A QUANTITATIVE UNDERSTANDING OF THE QUALITY OF THE CHEMISTRY JOB MARKET.
 |
| As you can see, the directors don't get paid. |
 |
| Not so for the officers of ACS, which are all firmly in the 1-2%. |
 |
| How their pay is structured, regarding bonuses and regular compensation. |
What's the job market like for chemists? Dude -- it's always bad.*
How bad is it? How the heck should I know? Quantifying the chemistry job market is what this blog is about. That, and helping chemists find jobs.
E-mail chemjobber with helpful tips, career questions or angry comments at chemjobber -at- gmail dotcom. All correspondence is kept confidential. (Didn't get an e-mail back? It's okay to try again.) Please address correspondence to "Chemjobber" or "CJ."
Voicemail/SMS: (302) 313-6257
Twitter: @chemjobber
RSS feed here
(The Blogger spam filter gets hungry sometimes, and likes to eat comments. You can e-mail me, and sometimes I can get it to cough up your comment. I am always happy to try.)
(*For the literal-minded, this is a joke. Mostly.)
Your dues at work!
ReplyDeleteTo me, that is just plain offensive. What the f*ck do these "chemists" they do all day? Sit in their chairs. Do they do expers? Of course not!
ReplyDeleteMedellin, explain this absurd compensation you receive.
I suggest boycotting publication in all ACS publications. That will bring them to their collective knees.
Has anyone reading this blog EVER received a 35% annual bonus? How about every year you've been employed?
ReplyDeleteIn an era of rampant underemployment and second postdocs, these numbers really hurt.
Retired chemist here, not by choice, who refuses to join the ACS and pay member dues. Crappy organization and I was president of ACS university chapter as an undergrad. I still have my Science Mag delivered weekly but ACS will never suck a dime from me. Sure would be nice to get salaries like that for doing science. You know, creating all the things that create all the wealth.
ReplyDeleteIm beginning to understand how the common Russian felt about the Royal Family before the Bolshevik revolution.
ReplyDeleteUnder the pretext of privacy and such, the compensation for these goons are beyond comprehension! Especially during these times when the chemists are still hurting.
ReplyDeleteThe annual ACS form 990 gives us an opportunity to hate on a diverse array of mark-ass marks, trick-ass marks, punk b*tches, skip-skaps, skanks and scallywags...
ReplyDeleteHate hate hate hate hate hate!
DeleteCalm down everyone. These are not outrageous executive salaries particularly considering the size of ACS and CAS. Also, president of the ACS is an elected position. If you want to bring in that cash, get involved and run.
ReplyDelete"Also, president of the ACS is an elected position. If you want to bring in that cash, get involved and run."
DeleteIncorrect.
Incorrect in the sense that president of the ACS is an elected position, yes, but unpaid. (See above, where good ol' Bassam didn't make a dime.)
DeleteCEO of the American Chemical Society is an appointed position, and, as you can see, that spot is compensated quite well.
FWIW, I agree that CAS is an organization that adds value to chemistry (LOTS of value, actually). (From what I understand, the salaries of their lower-tier employees (i.e. the B.S./M.S./Ph.D. chemists that collate and organize the information) are unimpressive at best. But let's leave that aside for the purposes of this discussion.) So I'm prepared to believe that their executives should be compensated well.
DeleteI am less sure about ACS Publications or ACS itself.
Without a doubt, ACS could do a much, much better job of justifying how it pays its top-level executives.
Starting salary of a literature analyst (or whatever they are called) with a PhD degree at CAS is in the vicinity of 52-53k. So I've been told.
DeleteACS Publications, on the other hand does nothing but takes information produced by research subsidized by the public and sells it to the libraries, also subsidized by the public. Nathan Ford would have been interested, too bad he's retired.
DeleteMadeleine "Million Dollar Baby" Jacobs
ReplyDeleteits just 907k a year. I feel sorry for her, the lakefront property taxes and insurance can be a killer; I don't see how she can manage without her in-laws chipping in
DeleteUpon graduating from school, a little of my paycheck was sent to them out of the kindness of my heart. Some other student I knew from the same school told me they do whatever they want with your donations and such, even if you mark it for a desired purpose. These practices and occurrences are common. Oh well.
ReplyDeleteWow. I expected to read this thinking "oh come on guys stop complaining, they deserve to make a couple of hundred thousand dollars for the job they do." Then BAM, 850K for Jacobs! Absurd. How can she justify a bonus? I'm willing to bet that we can find better leadership for half of that cost and still be competitive.
ReplyDeleteGo take a look at the Whitehouse visitor records (http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/disclosures/visitor-records). A quick search shows that Jacobs has visited the Obama Whitehouse 11 times while George Whitesides (father and son included here) has/have visited 55 times. I thought the ACS had influence.....
And this is the reason I will most likely not be renewing my membership after grad school (especially if I can't find a dang research position). Aside from some (broken on arrival) coffee mugs, and the privilege of reduced fees at two conferences, I'm not sure what I've really gained from being a member for 9 years.
ReplyDeleteI refuse to rejoin ACS. They are not in the business of assisting or advocating for chemists. They will not get my money.
DeleteI will not even use my employer's money to renew my membership.
The ACS Kulaks must be repeatidly whipped and the means of production returned to the chemists (open-access publishing).
ReplyDeleteUS Senators make $174k, a measly 18% of her chemical eminence...
ReplyDeleteYeah, but it's not like they actually do anything!
Delete55 hours a week? Well, now i feel bad complaining about how much they make. Certainly if they put in that much "effort"....
ReplyDeleteOne may note the degrees of the directors and the officers--there seems to be an inverse relationship between doctorates and high salaries. In fact i count only 2/11 of the 1%ers having a "Dr"! Ironic?
I remember a few years back (2010 I think) Jacobs wrote a C&EN article chiding a scientist who was having trouble finding work for telling her daughter that chemistry is not a good career choice. As far as I know, Jacobs spent some time in grad school but didn't finish. I don't even think she has a Master's.
ReplyDeleteJust last year! http://chemjobber.blogspot.com/2012/07/ms-madeleine-jacobs-sympathetic-but.html
DeleteI think it is pretty good that the ACS publish figures about the remuneration of the leading staff. As far as I know the UK Royal Society of Chemistry does not do this and so I have no idea how much they are paid
ReplyDeleteexecs).
That said, those salaries are quite eye-watering considering that this is a Chemical Society representing members, most of whom are paid much less to do proper chemistry.