 |
| "Who Goes to Graduate School and Who Succeeds?", Baum and Steele, The Urban Institute |
The Reserve Primary Fund was a large money market mutual fund.
On September 16, 2008, during the Global financial crisis of September–October, 2008, it lowered its share price below $1 ("breaking the buck") because of exposure to Lehman Brothers debt securities. This resulted in demands from investors to return their funds as the financial crisis mounted. Normally, the net asset value of money market funds is kept at $1.
Reserve Management had multiple other funds frozen because of this failure. It has liquidated a few funds, and post periodic updates about plans to liquidate other funds on its website.I had been looking for work for quite some time during my postdoc - I think I knew that the economy was in trouble by that point. I have clear memories of discussing the Reserve Fund failure with my interviewer, who was kind enough to pick me up in his car.
A woman who graduated with an M.S. in chemistry from a western university around the time of the recession recalls the difficulty of finding work as a new graduate. The woman, who did not want to be identified by name so that her job prospects would not be affected, was unemployed for two-and-a-half years, she says, and heartbroken at being unable to find work in a field she was passionate about.
But she had to pay the bills, including student loans, so she worked at a hotel chain before deciding to return to school for a nursing degree. Now that the woman has graduated and obtained her nursing license in two states, she has the luxury of choosing among four job offers.
Some chemists question whether they should encourage young people to go into the sciences when their journeys have been so difficult. “It’s kind of hard to encourage kids I know who want to go into science, which is terrible because it’s a great field, and we need scientists,” [CJ's note: former Pfizer chemist Pamela] Case says. “But when they ask for my experience, I have to be honest.” Many chemists like Case were forced to leave the bench.If I were laid off and could not find a job in my field, I would imagine it would be hard-pressed to recommend it to others. That's got to be a tough thing to mention during a career day session.
By 2019, G.D.P. per working-age adult is likely to be only 11 percent higher than when the crisis began (barring an unexpected growth surge or a recession). That’s a miserable growth rate over an extended period. Yes, the economy has done fairly well for last year or two, but not nearly well enough to make up for the long slump, especially because growth was also mediocre in the early 2000s. No wonder so many Americans are angry and frustrated.I have no answers, only more questions.
C&EN is seeking sources for an upcoming feature
Were you laid off during the Great Recession in 2007 and 2008? Or, was your career impacted in some other significant way (lost grant funding, lost employees, shuttered your business, etc.)? If so, C&EN would like to find out how you’ve been doing since then for a feature story on the 10th anniversary of the economic recession. We’re looking for chemists from industry, academia, government, and self-employment. Please e-mail Linda Wang at l_wang@acs.org if you’re willing to share your story.This is an important topic - I am glad to see C&EN covering it.
Since graduating in May 2012 with a degree in chemistry, Engel has worked at several part-time jobs, including substitute teaching, running an a cappella workshop at an elementary school in Arlington, Mass., and teaching music in Nicaragua, but hasn’t had much luck landing a full-time position. Influenced by Binyomin Abrams, a College of Arts & Sciences senior lecturer in chemistry, his long-term goal is to teach high school chemistry.
Currently in the process of applying to graduate schools, Engel estimates he’s applied for dozens of positions across the country in a variety of fields—chemistry, computer science (his minor at BU), music. “It’s been really frustrating, receiving rejections from some places or having my applications ignored,” he says.
Stewart told Engel he had studied chemistry himself during his first two years of college before switching to psychology. “He said he changed because in chemistry they want the right answer, but in psychology they just want an answer,” Engel says. “Stewart then asked me why I haven’t found a job teaching chemistry yet, saying he was sure there were people looking for a young teacher who’s passionate. Normally his responses to these questions are really short, but we had a dialogue going.”
Soon after the show’s taping got under way, Stewart made a plea on his behalf in front of millions of viewers, catching Engel by surprise.
“If your school is currently looking for a chemistry teacher, I want you to call us,” Stewart said to the camera, as he opened Monday night’s show. “I got a guy over here, Boston University, seems smart—could have shaved. He’s a chemistry major, he’s looking for a job teaching chemistry…so if you need a chemistry teacher, contact us, and I will finally get this [expletive] kid out of his parents’ house. That’s what I’m going to do.”You can watch the first segment here (after the ad, it's basically less than a minute into the show.) Best of luck to Mr. Engel -- and, no, you're not alone by any means. Best wishes to you, and to all of us.
"not all those people remained unemployed, and the total headcount of the pharmaceutical industry did not drop that much. Many of those who were laid off were probably hired back by other drug makers. Some folks have probably been laid off more than once. It’s also worth noting that big mergers are one reason for the cuts."This is a vital industry, and one that I'm proud to be a part of. While I think there are definitely glimmers of hope here and there, times are still very hard. Best wishes to all of us.
 |
| Credit: C&EN |
 |
ACC's Chemical Activity Barometer. Note that the blue line (the CAB)
tends to show the same trend as industrial production, but a little
bit ahead.
|
“Despite the uncertainty being fueled by political gridlock in Washington, the fundamentals of our economy appear to be healthy,” said Dr. Kevin Swift, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council. This month’s Chemical Activity Barometer is up 0.3 percent and this follows upticks in August and September as well,” he said.
Though some recent reports have hinted at a slowing of consumer spending, these are likely related to news coming out of Washington, according to Swift. “Production of plastic resins used in consumer applications appears actually to be strengthening, suggesting further gains driven by consumers. This bodes well for retailers as the important holiday shopping season approaches,” he added.
Other notable benchmarks within the barometer also held strong. Chemical equities continued to outpace the overall market, as measured by the S&P 500 and inventories and new orders expanded, likely restored by a return of business confidence following the end of the government shutdown.I have been holding the Chemical Activity Barometer at arm's length, because I don't think that it necessarily tracks with chemist employment or even the broader U.S. economy. That said, Bill McBride of Calculated Risk has been paying attention to it... so maybe I should be, too.
 |
| Credit: Calculated Risk |
 |
| Credit: Calculated Risk |
One particularly jarring example of this brain drain, recounted by two independent sources, took place in the summer and fall of 2012. A young researcher in the Midwest with a Ph.D. in chemistry from a prominent state school had been left unemployed after the project on which she had worked didn't get a follow-up grant. Three months of attempting to find research or academic work produced no results. With no other options, she rewrote her resume, stripping it of any mention of her Ph.D., and began applying elsewhere. Within a week, she had secured a job as a secretary at an auto parts company.
The Huffington Post tracked down the researcher, "Rebecca," who asked that her real name not be used out of concern that it could jeopardize her current employment. Rebecca confirmed her story. Now an executive at the auto parts company, she recalled the abrupt end to her previous career as a "depressing" moment, filled with uncertainty.
"It is possible that I could have gone to another college and gotten another post doc, but that's a temporary position," Rebecca said. "When I started way back in the day, this was the field to go into ... it is a much different field today."
Despite 11 years of education (five as an undergrad, six for her Ph.D.) and aspirations of being a chemist, Rebecca said she has left science for good. She is happy with life outside the lab. Her company takes good care of her.
"They are already scared I'm not there to stay because they know I'm bright," she said. "They just don't how bright."I wonder what pushed her to make this decision? It very clearly sounds like Rebecca wants out of science, which is understandable. Well, here's hoping that she is happy with her current position.
The economy may be puttering steadily along, but young people are falling behind. Annie Lowrey reports that younger workers are doing worse than one particularly personal gauge of success — their parents. A study by the Urban Institute finds that Americans under 40 have accumulated less wealth than their parents at the same age. As Lowrey points out, “because wealth compounds over long periods of time”, that puts young people at a distinct long-term disadvantage, and also lowers economic expectations. The usual culprits — stagnant wages, the financial crisis, student debt — are to blame....
On the bright side (sort of), younger consumers are less enthusiastic about credit cards than they used to be. Which is fine, because for credit card companies, the feeling is mutual. They’re just not that enthusiastic about extending credit in an idling economy to people with falling wages and shockingly large amounts of student debt...
[snip] The Urban Institute calculates that $42,000 in wealth can be lost if you buy a house when you’re 40 rather than 30. The problem is that this number comes from using data from the “past few decades”. Price appreciation during those few decades, we now know, was an anomaly.Here's an interesting post from Jordan Weissman of The Atlantic that makes much the same point, but points out that the drop in wealth may be most specific to those people that are ages 29-37 (h/t to @StephanieK and SeeArrOh):
...the housing market crashed just as today's thirty-somethings were getting into it. As a result, they found themselves in lots of debt and with very little to show for it. As the real estate researchers at Zillow reported in August, homeowners in their thirties are still the most likely to be underwater on their mortgages.
[T]today's thirty somethings are climbing out of a deep enough hole that they may never become as wealthy as the boomers unless home values rebound dramatically, and even then, many will only be getting back to even.I have a couple of thoughts about all of this:
As part of my initiative to promote jobs, ACS will launch a program in New Orleans that is intended to expand job opportunities for ACS members. The International Employment Initiative (IEI) will bring international recruiters to meet job seekers at Sci-Mix on April 8 and the ACS Virtual Career Fair on April 8–9. Connecting job seekers with global opportunities increases potential options for members looking for new prospects.
The launch of IEI at Sci-Mix will coincide with introduction of the new ACS International Center. The center will serve as a comprehensive source of information about work, education, and travel around the globe. It can offer guidance for members wishing to explore jobs or exchange programs.
In the increasingly global chemistry enterprise, job opportunities—whether in teaching, research, manufacturing, marketing, sales, or beyond—can be found anywhere in the world. Because today’s job opportunities are global, empowering our members to participate in this global enterprise can be transforming. I have met many individuals who have reinvented themselves with second careers overseas, where their skills and knowledge have found new homes.
To remain competitive in this global chemistry enterprise, we must encourage members to view globalization more as an opportunity than a threat. Like it or not, globalization is here to stay and indeed is accelerating. My first priority remains serving our domestic members, and I am strongly advocating to bring both advanced manufacturing and research jobs home through regulatory and tax reform incentives.I think it's fascinating when such a paragraph shows up in someone's text without a variety of accompanying words, such as: America, China, Indian, pay, salary and outsourcing. Of course, we have to use the Up Goer Five editor to make things a little more clear:
If you are looking for a job, maybe you can find more jobs in places not in your home. We can help you do that. Lots of people have done that.The rest of President Wu's essay talks about the different ways that she's trying to help ACS members, i.e. 25 free SciFinder searches! (Actually I think that's a pretty cool idea, especially for interview agenda checking.) Also, she wants to hear how ACS members think that she should help members.
We must learn to view globalization—the movement of research, manufacturing, and consumption around the world—more as an opportunity than a threat. Globalization is here to stay and, indeed, it is accelerating.
The task force recommendations were presented to the ACS Board of Directors in December to show how ACS can help connect members with more employment opportunities and thrive in an increasingly global environment. After incorporating the board’s feedback, action steps will be finalized and shared broadly with ACS leaders and members to facilitate implementation during the course of this year and beyond.
For example, we are launching a new International Employment Initiative (IEI) at the April 2013 ACS national meeting in New Orleans at Sci-Mix. Employers with overseas job opportunities will be able to connect with job seekers. IEI will be part of the ACS Career Fair and also the virtual career fair. In addition, a Presidential Career Advancement Symposium highlighting numerous successful career paths including entrepreneurship will be featured at the September 2013 ACS national meeting in Indianapolis.I found this sadly full of buzzwords, so I decided to do my own version in Up Goer Five language (i.e. the 1000 most common words in the English language) -- let's see if it makes more sense:
The study of stuff, how to make new stuff and the spending of money on stuff will change from how it is now (where we have lots of money, and people in other parts of the world have less money) to a world where many people in other parts of the world have about as much money as us. That is a good thing that might help us make more money and it might not be a bad thing. This will not go away, and it is probably happening faster.
The people that I asked to help me with this told me and the people who work with me to show how our group can help people find more jobs and do well in this world where people living around our world, but not near us have almost as much money as we do. Once we agree, we will tell you about how to make this happen this year and later.
Very soon, we are going to help people find jobs not here in the States, but other places in the world. In the fall, we will be talking about how you can make your own job, or ask people to give you money to help make your own job.Sounds about right.
The unemployment rate for ACS chemists fell from the all-time high of 4.6% as of March 2011 to 4.2% in March 2012. This number was still high, and CEPA was concerned.
The percentage of ACS chemists who experienced some period of unemployment during 2011 was 8.2%, down slightly from the year before, with a median length of unemployment of four months. Industry members had the greatest probability of a period of unemployment.
Some 12% of ACS member chemists said that in the prior three years they had accepted a position or compensation package that was less than their previous position in order to maintain employment.
In addition, 9% of chemists felt their current position was not in-line with their professional goals, 8% felt it was not commensurate with their level of education or training, 6% said it was not professionally challenging, and 6% said it was not related to the field of their degree.
The rise and fall of salaries for chemists measures the demand for our services and expertise. In 2012, salaries in real dollars declined for Ph.D. and M.S. chemists, while B.S. chemists kept pace with inflation. In addition, many members reported that they were “underemployed” and that some employers were hiring higher degree holders at “rock-bottom” prices.
Overall, the majority predicted their situation would be about the same in March of 2013, with only 25% expecting their employment situation to improve. Interestingly, postdocs and those currently unemployed were significantly more optimistic than those employed full-time or part-time.
The percentage of respondents employed in domestic chemistry-related manufacturing jobs continued to decline, while the share of nonmanufacturing jobs also showed decline. Self-employment remained stable, accounting for roughly 2% of respondents.There's some new information in there, so I'll be circling back to this. For now, do be sure to check out the slides that are attached with the report, including the still-irritating comparison of ACS members with construction workers and nursing home attendants*.
"Given what seems to be a permanently restructured employment market for PhDs, the Commission perceives a risk that the number of career opportunities in the chemical science professions may be insufficient to accommodate those qualified for and desiring entry."
"In the last decade, 300,000 jobs have been lost in the pharmaceutical industry worldwide. This total is larger than the entire US pharmaceutical employment base. Large US research facilities have been closed and sizable systematic reductions in domestic research capabilities have been implemented or announced, apparently driven in significant part by consolidation in the industry. Some of the reduced functions have been outsourced to other technologically strong nations."On too many chemists:
"A large undergraduate teaching need is not a sufficient justification for a large graduate program."
"In discussing the employment scene earlier in this chapter, the Commission was frank in its assessment that the current rate of PhD production is too large. While some portion of the excess reflects the current stage of the business cycle, there is evidence, in the growth of postdoctoral employment and in stagnant salaries over a long term, that the nation is producing a systematic excess of PhDs."On teaching undergraduates:
"While graduate students are certainly exposed to teaching through teaching assistantships, their experiences generally are not drawn from carefully crafted programs designed to teach students how to teach."On postdocs:
"Some statistics about postdoctoral associates are enlightening. In 2009, the most recent year for which the NSF has published detailed data, there were approximately 4200 postdocs in chemistry, 2350 in biochemistry, and 1100 in chemical engineering. The percentages of temporary visa holders in these groups were 64.7%, 60.7%, and 62.4%, respectively."
"A significant problem in the current employment pipeline for chemists is a bulge at the postdoctoral level. Particularly in more biological areas of chemistry, many current postdocs have previously been postdocs for one or even two appointments. For these individuals, the second, or later, postdoctoral appointment serves largely as a buffer zone in the ebb and flow of the job market; it is not a position that significantly improves one’s job chances." (emphasis mine)Quite an indictment of the current state of affairs.
Every time you read someone extolling the dynamism of the modern economy, the virtues of risk-taking, declaring that everyone has to expect to have multiple jobs in his or her life and that you can never stop learning, etc,, etc., bear in mind that this is a portrait of an economy with no stability, no guarantees that hard work will provide a consistent living, and a constant possibility of being thrown aside simply because you happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.There are a lot of political responses to this paragraph (Krugman argues for stronger state benefits in his post), but that's not what I am focused on. I do this that it is a remarkably apt counterpoint to Professor Whitesides' call for chemical entrepreneurship, or Madeleine Jacobs' comments about "thriving in the global workforce."
Against the backdrop of a slowly strengthening U.S. economy, chemical firms saw earnings slide again in the third quarter, in large part because of rapidly declining prices. Out of 21 firms tracked by C&EN, Dow Chemical, DuPont, and eight other companies reported lower sales and earnings in the quarter compared with last year.
The results prompted promises by chief executive officers to heighten the cost-cutting moves they have been implementing throughout the postrecession recovery. As they announced financial results, Dow CEO Andrew N. Liveris and DuPont CEO Ellen J. Kullman unveiled additional restructuring plans, including layoffs, to be implemented in the fourth quarter and beyond (C&EN, Oct. 29, page 7). Then, one week after Dow’s Oct. 23 announcement, the company amended its tally of layoffs, saying it will cut 3,000 positions in the next two years, an increase of 600 from the original statement and equal to 6.3% of the firm’s workforce.From Ann Thayer, same thing goes for the pharma companies:
For the third consecutive quarter, no relief came as combined sales and earnings declined at the major pharma companies tracked by C&EN. Overall, quarterly sales fell 5.0%, and earnings for the companies that reported them dropped 9.1%. For the first nine months of the year, sales were down 3.0%, while earnings declined 5.4%. By comparison, in the first half of 2012, sales slipped just 2.1% and earnings were down 3.5%.
Four companies reported double-digit drops in sales, and five had similar-sized slides in earnings. Hardest hit was Bristol-Myers Squibb. Its third-quarter sales plummeted 30.1% to $3.7 billion, and earnings dropped by an even larger 34.3% to $685 million. U.S. patents expired in March on its high blood pressure drug Avapro and in May on the blood thinner Plavix. Excluding these two products, the company’s sales were up 7% compared with the third quarter of 2011.Does anyone foresee another round of layoffs from Big Pharma? By now, I can't see how they could cut more (he said naively.)
 |
Credit: C&EN*
|
Zeroing in on the U.S. chemical manufacturing sector, employment totaled 799,600 on a seasonally adjusted basis in September 2012, up 0.2% from the prior month and up 0.7% from September 2011, according to preliminary figures from BLS. That’s good news, but it’s little comfort to the hundreds of thousands of people who lost their jobs in prior months. At the start of the Great Recession in December 2007, employment in the sector was 857,600. Five years earlier, it was 921,500. And 10 years before that—in December 1992—chemical manufacturing employees numbered 1.03 million.Yikes.
