I recently sent an e-mail to Dr. Bonnie Charpentier, who is currently running for the ACS President-Elect position to see if she was interested in answering last year's questions for ACS presidential candidates.
She responded today. Her unedited response is below:
1. Which ACS program do you think best helps the
job-seeking ACS member? How would you improve it?
The most complete resource for ACS members is
Career Navigator, which provides a menu of different programs and tools for
job-seekers and others interested in exploring career options and professional
development. Options under career navigator include offerings such as resume
writing, career consulting, professional education courses and links to
information about salaries and survey results. One way it could be improved by
making sure that members know about it.
I think some of our strongest programs involve
member-to-member connections and communication. More and more jobs are in small
companies, and according to information in the press, including an article in
the New York Times, a large percentage of jobs are obtained through referrals.
Most of those jobs are not advertised at venues such as national meetings nor
in C&EN. We could make it easier for members to share information about
opportunities broadly with each other online through ACS.
2. Is it ACS policy to get more students to
study in STEM fields, specifically chemistry? If so, how do we reconcile the
fact that wages for chemists are stagnant? Does this argue against the idea of
a STEM shortage and the need for more STEM students?
ACS has a policy
titled “Strengthen Science Education and the Scientific Workforce” which, among
other things, calls for strengthening support for science education facilities
and teacher education and training, supports nurturing students of all
backgrounds in pursuit of studies and careers in STEM, and urges Congress to
reduce the complexity of 401(k) plans available to small business owners. The
policy can be found at https://www.acs.org/content/acs/en/policy/publicpolicies/education.html
I personally am a
strong advocate for strengthening STEM education everywhere for all students to
make them more informed as consumers and as the electorate. The advantages of a
scientifically literate public are numerous and important.
I believe we should
provide information to students about potential career paths and provide as
accurate information as we can about job prospects in different fields of STEM.
Education in STEM can be useful in many different types of jobs and
professions. The caveat is that where the jobs are (both geographically and
technically) changes over time. I believe students should pursue what interests
them and what they love, with as clear an understanding of relevant job
prospects as possible.
The wages for chemists
and other STEM professionals are affected by many complex economic factors, and
scientific and technical skills are needed in many areas. What we can do for
our members is identify areas where those skills are needed, provide training
to help us all stay current technically and develop additional important
non-technical skills to improve job prospects.
3. In the past decade, what was the one action
of any ACS President that has had the greatest influence - good or bad - on
members' employment and careers? Other than working groups and reports, what
tangible steps would you take to increase the number of chemistry jobs in the
US, and is this something you think is really achievable?
To be successful, any program to influence
members’ careers must be sustainable and supported by the actions of more than
one individual. All recent ACS presidents have sought to address employment
issues for chemists; including, as noted in the question, multiple task forces
and reports, some of which provided useful insights. In my industry career I
have had to deal with lay-offs and site closures, and I know firsthand that
employment statistics showing things are better for chemists than in some other
fields don’t mean much to an individual who can’t find a job.
On the negative side, it seems unlikely that
large corporations in traditional areas will change the pattern of down-sizing
and layoffs we have become accustomed to seeing. On the positive side, advances
in many new areas of technology require the skills of chemists. Chemists are
creating jobs for chemists in start-ups and small businesses. We can advocate
strongly for policies that incentivize job creation in chemistry and other
fields that are vital to our overall economy and well-being, and that is
something I would pursue with vigor. ACS has recently been bringing together
CTO’s from big companies for discussions; we can do more to work with small
companies and start-ups, and to encourage collaboration between academia and
industry.
4. One of the chief
roles of the ACS is to advocate for chemists in the US Congress. Which of the
following options would you prioritize, and why? (increased grant funding, more
training in entrepreneurship for students, shifting funding from academia to
more SBIRs or retraining postdocs?)
Having spent time on
Capitol Hill advocating for chemists and funding for science and education, and
in my current job, walking the Hill with patients and patient advocates
regarding rare diseases, one thing I’ve learned is that it is more effective to
advocate for actions that have understandable human consequences than for esoteric
concepts. (Another thing I’ve learned is that it can be more effective to talk
with senators and representatives in their home districts than on the Hill, but
that is another topic).
My priority would be
to advocate for funding for science and technology with clear and concrete
examples of the importance of that funding to the discovery and development of such
things as medicines, energy sources, clean water, new technologies and the
importance to our lives and economic well-being. In this time of bitter
partisanship, focusing on areas of concrete importance to constituents is one
way toward bi-partisan support. I don’t see this as a question of shifting
funding from academia to more SBIRs; both are important, and both can be
supported by solid and reliable funding, as can grants and educational
programs.
5. It has been 8 years since the official end of
the Great Recession. What should ACS be doing to prepare our members for the
next recession?
The most obvious
answer is to help our members maintain marketable technical and soft skills
through continuing education, leadership, and entrepreneurial training. These
are important at any time, but clearly more critical in economic downturns. Our
programs must be kept strong, relevant and effective for our members. The
ability for members to network and support each other with employment
information is also important.
A less obvious answer
is that to do these things ACS must be sustainable. In my opinion, we could
have done a better job with some decision-making during the last recession.
After that experience, plans were put in place to establish clear priorities
and financial contingencies and it is very important that ACS keep those plans
current in the event of another recession to enable the financial
sustainability of the Society and services for members.
Thanks to Dr. Charpentier for her responses.
