tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post3647292431703900377..comments2024-03-27T21:23:40.339-04:00Comments on Chemjobber: We are the grist: "The Real Science Gap" and the present and future of industrial jobs in chemistryChemjobberhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comBlogger86125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-74188026680369690882011-04-24T21:44:22.268-04:002011-04-24T21:44:22.268-04:00The most important thing for the whole industry is...The most important thing for the whole industry is "what does the industry really need?" In old days, people tend to pay more attention to the technical side. Technical is the key to make progress. Today industry tends to pay more attention on the personal side. If you are not good at technical, no problem. We can train you. Here is a good example, when we go to the bookstores, how many books are about interviews? On the another hand, however many books are about the real technology? I do not think that the real world is really encouraging people to pursue the technology.<br /><br />Here is my own experience. <br /><br />Example 1:<br />When I was working in a company, we got four interviewers for 4 positions. The one with the best knowledge was eliminated. The reason was that he asked some questions, such as "do you have this type software etc." My company thought that he said something technical. <br /><br />Example 2:<br />When the manager went to ACS meeting, he said that "the company will not take the one with the best knowledge. If we found somebody was nervous in talking, but felt very comfortable in discussion the science. He/She will be eliminated from the candidate list." <br /><br />Example #3:<br /><br />As myself, I did technical support (TSR). There were 8 people in the group. My completed TSR was ~ 23% in the whole group. I was laid off. So ...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-90327148789544500302010-12-15T14:39:43.077-05:002010-12-15T14:39:43.077-05:00Good point Tumbler, I think we're arguing sema...Good point Tumbler, I think we're arguing semantics. Take out the part about Easy St., I think that makes it more clear.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-59501762840207468862010-12-15T12:33:29.563-05:002010-12-15T12:33:29.563-05:00"I can't help feeling a little irritated ..."I can't help feeling a little irritated by these comments FentonH. Whilst you do have a valid point to an extent, this smacks of 'sour grapes' somewhat. You have obviously been employed elsewhere in the world (presumably at the cost of the 'local' governments and in preference to members of the 'local' workforce). So, are you suggesting this privilege should now be removed for others wanting to come to the States to do precisely the same thing just because you can't land a job? "<br /><br />Let's set the record straight for the circumstances of my employment (chronologically):<br />Germany - doctoral student, partially paid living expenses out of my own pocket<br />Switzerland - T. A., no luck at academic positions<br />England - 5-year contract (my British colleagues got permanent contracts), but then our university closed our chem degree program<br />Canada - retro-post-doc.<br /><br />Whereas I will admit that 'sour grapes' is a factor in my own situation, the fact is that US job market is a lot more open than in those other countries (including your own) and that has to stop.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-28608972523552887142010-12-15T11:02:20.609-05:002010-12-15T11:02:20.609-05:00"But the point is, don't most people beli..."But the point is, don't most people believe that getting a Ph.D at some point will make their life easier than if they hadn't gotten it?"<br /><br />Of course they do. There isn't any other reason to do it. My point is it isn't really easy st just because things become easier. I don't think college grads expect to be on easy st either. Say you're pretty bright and ambitious (enough that you could have done pretty well in grad school) and you work really hard for about ten years and do really well for your company or companies (at whatever -business). You'd expect your career to be in reasonably good shape -that you would be able to keep your job or find another one that treats you more fairly, i.e. you'd be employable. You wouldn't expect to be on the low end of the totem pole with dire prospects. Perhaps we just have different ideas about what easy st is and I do bristle at that term and what I perceive to be its connotations. I never thought I was getting a golden ticket, just a fair deal.Tumblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-6161636079659270972010-12-15T09:15:12.259-05:002010-12-15T09:15:12.259-05:00FentonH said:
I would echo the conclusion that re...FentonH said:<br /><br />I would echo the conclusion that restricting hiring practices to citizens of one's own country isn't xenophobic:<br />(1) if you can't respect your own citizens, then how can you fund research from their tax revenue?<br />(2)As I've mentioned elsewhere, I spent 16 years of my professional life in Germany, Switzerland, England and Canada. As an American, do you think that I was granted equal access to jobs in those countries? <br /><br />I can't help feeling a little irritated by these comments FentonH. Whilst you do have a valid point to an extent, this smacks of 'sour grapes' somewhat. You have obviously been employed elsewhere in the world (presumably at the cost of the 'local' governments and in preference to members of the 'local' workforce). So, are you suggesting this privilege should now be removed for others wanting to come to the States to do precisely the same thing just because you can't land a job?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-51842248331243240962010-12-15T08:34:07.046-05:002010-12-15T08:34:07.046-05:00You might as well say anyone with a college degree...<i>You might as well say anyone with a college degree expects to be on easy st by their 30s.</i><br /><br />Well, is that not true? I don't think anyone that goes to college envisions that they'll be struggling to make ends meet when they're 30, it seems like an eternity away when you're 18.<br /><br />But the point is, don't most people believe that getting a Ph.D at some point will make their life easier than if they hadn't gotten it? If grad students knew of the struggles that are afflicting med chemists right now, would they have gone to grad school anyways? I'm willing to wager a good number wouldn't have. It sounds like you have some frustrations of your own about finding a position. Is that what you imagined would happen after you finished your Ph.D? Like I said, this situation isn't new, it's just not being told to the incoming grad students.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-83818121498322273802010-12-14T23:12:43.206-05:002010-12-14T23:12:43.206-05:00I guess I was very delusional 5 years ago ago when...I guess I was very delusional 5 years ago ago when I decided to pursue a PhD degree in chemistry at some Midwest low-tier university. After spending last years at the bench with little social life other than research work, it feels pretty shitty to find yourself in a situation when you have to struggle to find any employment in this industry. I'm about to graduate shortly and I've been applying at lots of places (hundreds) for almost a year. Even with a few papers in your portfolio, but lousy academic credentials like mine, the industry in this country won't hire you anyhow and anywhere. The jolly academia offers you a postdoc position (hopefully, at some mediocre place). Yeah, right... As much as I love science, this postdoc path is likely to go nowhere and only to end up with the same, maybe even more severe, unemployment problems at older age. I'm glad it happened to me now when I still have time to rethink my career and find a different way to make a living. But, despite what academic staff tell, I will sure as hell make it clear to other students at my place what their prospects are.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-46345518403775962512010-12-14T22:05:04.279-05:002010-12-14T22:05:04.279-05:00"@Anon 4:52AM
Would you mind telling us what ..."@Anon 4:52AM<br />Would you mind telling us what this new field is you're learning and how you went about finding it and getting a foot in the door. I think it would be really interesting to hear."<br /><br />Got laid-off from pharma. Job search consisted of non-pharma and pharma positions. Wanted a non-pharma position, considering the big pharma contraction going on. Got a lot more interviews for pharma than non-pharma, but accepted a non-pharma position. My new field is very specialized (and small), but still utilizes organic chemistry.<br /><br />I got the position by a good deal of luck and the patience to endure some rejections. I consider it a semi-career switch as I can apply some stuff I learned in pharma, but still am learning a great deal. I got the job because they needed someone in their field who also knows synthetic chemistry. That particular combo was hard to come by, so they settled on training me. :-)<br /><br />I think I got my foot in the door by showing eagerness to learn. Keep trying, and don't be afraid to apply to very specialized fields. People don't usually learn those fields in graduate school so companies have to train someone. It might as well be you.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-40820381898630089282010-12-14T21:24:54.499-05:002010-12-14T21:24:54.499-05:00Unfortunately this "highly skilled but unempl...Unfortunately this "highly skilled but unemployed" problem is now spreading to even China.<br /><br />http://shanghaiist.com/2010/12/14/chinas_ant_tribe_university_degrees.php<br /><br />China now has an "Ant Tribe" of college grads that can't find work at wages above what they could have got without their degrees.<br /><br />There are even PhD street sweepers:<br />http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2007-01/03/content_778128.htm<br /><br />So we don't have it too bad, but I would still say the lesson here is that govt funding can exasperate supply/demand misalignments very badly and for much longer than a free market.Quagmirenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-12324424695938280242010-12-14T20:42:57.190-05:002010-12-14T20:42:57.190-05:00A2:11,
You might as well say anyone with a colleg...A2:11,<br /><br />You might as well say anyone with a college degree expects to be on easy st by their 30s.Tumblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-11096589354190456722010-12-14T17:11:52.287-05:002010-12-14T17:11:52.287-05:00Tumbler, you sort of answered your own question. ...Tumbler, you sort of answered your own question. You maybe didn't use the specific terms that you'd be on Easy St, but did you ever imagine that after 5-7 years of grad school (and maybe another couple as a postdoc) that you'd have to scratch and claw at positions and that you might end up doing something like reading documents all day instead of working in the lab? Or did you think that a Ph.D would allow you to get a decent faculty or industry position that would allow you to live comfortably and be happy? How many Ph.Ds have you heard tell prospective grad students that a Ph.D is the best thing in the world? How many say the opposite? I'm willing to bet the equilibrium lies towards the former comment.<br /><br />CJ, yes, grad students don't accrue debt. Yes, doctors come out with $100K of debt. But they're also provided a means to pay back that money, and it's basically guaranteed. I've never heard of physicians getting forced into alternative careers because they didn't have enough opportunity to apply their trade. If you're lucky enough to get through undergrad and grad school with no school loans (very rare scenario for most) and you are also fortunate enough to secure a pharma position without doing a postdoc (these days rare) then you have, what, 10 years to make money before the axe falls and you get laid off? 10 years if you're lucky, right? Then you re-train for something like Regulatory Affairs or keep job hopping to different pharmas living nomadically. Is that better than having a lot of debt right out of school but then having guaranteed and stable income after? That's up to each person to decide, but they should at least know the difference.<br /><br />The difference is that MDs go into their programs knowing that they will have crushing debt whereas most grad students have no idea how challenging their path is AFTER graduation (and this struggle for employment isn't new, as noted by Retired Chemist). As I said earlier, most believe they will have lucrative careers and there's not many people who will tell them differently.<br /><br />I've heard some rumblings that law students are in a similar predicament as chemists, there's more of them than the job force can absorb. The difference is that the schools are taking proactive steps to facilitate their employment because their placement rate factors into their school rankings. I read a report (I can find the link and post it if you like) about one school retroactively raising their students' grades in some classes in order to boost their GPAs and make them more competitive. I don't know any grad programs that care this much (or at all) about how their students fare after graduation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-14022290477211670442010-12-14T15:22:09.362-05:002010-12-14T15:22:09.362-05:00"And the main difference between the pharma/l..."And the main difference between the pharma/law/medicine 'payment' is that getting your advanced degree in the sciences is basically 'free' versus the enormous amount of debt medical and law school saddles its people with."<br /><br />That's not a big enough difference. It's understood that the payoff won't be as big, but the sacrifice of prime earning years and the hours you work during those years requires a real return. To throw away the better part of a decade on these activities makes a result of being unable to find a good job and having a grim future not at all worth it. Whether or not med school or law school would have been a better choice, I think for a lot of people a PhD in chemistry turned out to be a very bad choice. <br />I still don't know why people think it's asking so much for people to expect a reasonable job out of a PhD. Sometimes it seems people think I want a free ride.Tumblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-38801595279510686502010-12-14T14:54:18.690-05:002010-12-14T14:54:18.690-05:00Good point, YP. If you left with debt, it was cons...Good point, YP. If you left with debt, it was consumption (beer, housing, car) as opposed to 'investment', i.e. tuition.Chemjobberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-110224687838842532010-12-14T14:41:55.231-05:002010-12-14T14:41:55.231-05:00And the main difference between the pharma/law/med...And the main difference between the pharma/law/medicine 'payment' is that getting your advanced degree in the sciences is basically 'free' versus the enormous amount of debt medical and law school saddles its people with.<br /><br />Free is relative, of course, but no-one walks out of a PhD program with $100K in student loan debt for their effort...You're Pfizerednoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-69315266982265711102010-12-14T14:14:53.537-05:002010-12-14T14:14:53.537-05:00There really aren't very many tickets to Easy ...There really aren't very many tickets to Easy Street; most high paying jobs have a brutal entry fee. <br /><br />Elite pharma: brutal PhD (5+ years), brutal postdoc (2+ years), 100k position. <br />BigLaw: Routine snuggle-up buttkissing during internships during law school (3 years), 5 to 10 torturous years as an associate in a law firm. <br />Medicine: Difficult undergrad selection process, tough professional school (4 years), 2 to 8 years as a resident/fellow before big paychecks. <br /><br />It's really a process of "pay now" or "pay later"; there's a reason why engineering undergrads seem so harried.Chemjobberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-62973745813768387782010-12-14T14:01:24.567-05:002010-12-14T14:01:24.567-05:00"Too many people in grad school don't. Th..."Too many people in grad school don't. They are under the impression that having a Ph.D will be their bus ticket to Easy St. with a stable, high-paying job and limitless demand for their skills. It's not entirely their fault though, that's exactly the way many professors and senior scientists make a Ph.D sound."<br /><br />I'm not sure where this sentiment comes from -that students see a PhD as a ticket to easy street. Do people really believe that about students and do students really believe that about PhDs? I've never known either to be true judging by the people I've known and talked to, but this isn't the first time I've seen this notion expressed in an online forum. I certainly never saw a PhD that way. That's not to say I figured it wasn't worth anything. I didn't get a PhD as a favor to society.Tumblernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-35450626420290887182010-12-14T13:38:18.552-05:002010-12-14T13:38:18.552-05:00If you too could not post a comment, please e-mail...If you too could not post a comment, please e-mail me the comment at chemjobber -at- gmaildotcom.Chemjobberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-31602663377211806092010-12-14T13:37:47.089-05:002010-12-14T13:37:47.089-05:00From a Retired Chemist (who apparently could not p...From a Retired Chemist (who apparently could not post a comment)<br /><br />I just came across the site yesterday and would like to offer my perspective. I don’t think things have changed that much over the years. I finished my doctorate in chemistry in 1975 and did a post-doc at a top Ivy. I knew things were tough when I was applying for faculty positions and there were 400 applicants for a spot in the biochemistry department at Wyoming. I moved on to a staff position at NIH but tenure was really not in the cards and after five years I switched over to regulatory affairs and spent 27 years in trade association work which was quite fulfilling.<br /><br />We will always see an excess of PhDs as long as the Federal government continues to fund research grants. The blunt truth is that PhDs and post-docs are cheap labor for PIs and tenured faculty positions will always be limited leaving a lot of folks on soft money positions in academia. Were it not for the biotechnology industry’s explosion in the mid-1970s the situation would be more dire than it is today. I haven’t looked at the recent employment statistics but I do remember in the late 1980s and early 1990s, biotechnology companies were in a hiring frenzy; that has probably slowed by now.<br /><br />Despite all the predictions of America falling behind in the knowledge race, I believe this is not the case and we will continue to produce outstanding scientists and engineers as long as the government keeps the funding spigot open. The bigger problem is whether these folks will have a meaningful long-term career with the current uncertainties. My advice (at least for those interested in the life science aspects) is to go to medical school in a combined MD/PhD program. Employment options are dramatically increased (several grad school colleagues are now practicing physicians).Chemjobberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-51887301713534781272010-12-14T11:53:05.020-05:002010-12-14T11:53:05.020-05:00A8:44a:
Please, PLEASE e-mail me at chemjobber -a...A8:44a:<br /><br />Please, PLEASE e-mail me at chemjobber -at- gmaildotcom. I'd love to hear your story.Chemjobberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15932113680515602275noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-61186411340308960312010-12-14T11:44:50.880-05:002010-12-14T11:44:50.880-05:00Hi Chemjobber,
I like your blog and think you hav...Hi Chemjobber,<br /><br />I like your blog and think you have a good take on the biz. You had a link regarding electrochemist employment in the battery field and it took me to a previous blog post about a position with Toyota. I actually interviewed for this position but didn't get it(I was runner up). I can actually tell you that I unfortunately don't have 2-3 offers right now! Even with research experience in this area, if you don't have industry experience, you'll find yourself having a tough time breaking into it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-37881235351953551742010-12-14T10:41:25.702-05:002010-12-14T10:41:25.702-05:00@Anon 4:52AM
Would you mind telling us what this n...@Anon 4:52AM<br />Would you mind telling us what this new field is you're learning and how you went about finding it and getting a foot in the door. I think it would be really interesting to hear.<br />And yeah that's great if it happens the way it did in your case. But what happens when employers stubbornly refuse to hire b/c they know that with a glut of labor they can wait around for their perfect candidate? On the flip side, laid off chemists probably hold out as long as possible to try to get the same standard of living they had before the layoff. But would they be more willing to take a temporary pay cut if it meant they'd eventually be ensured full-time employment with a salary increase after the training period? <br />Robert Reich makes an interesting point in his book Aftershock... he proposes we have "re-employment insurance" rather than unemployment benefits. In other words, instead of getting unemployment benefits while searching for a job, you would get the benefits by going to work in an area that needs workers. In essence the gov would be paying you to get retrained. You would have a lower pay for a while, but eventually once you're training you should be able to command a higher salary.That's essentially what I am proposing for the government funded industry postdoc/retraining.<br />Stewie GriffinAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-82636291029642769642010-12-14T09:10:00.323-05:002010-12-14T09:10:00.323-05:00I think it would be worth doing a survey about the...I think it would be worth doing a survey about the average salaries negotiated by foreign vs native postdocs. But apart from this, another good point raised above is that it also doesn't always help if foreign students get their PhDs or postdocs here and go back to their country; then they just end up working for the competitor and also siphon off jobs here through outsourcing. There are also deeper consequences; for instance, many Chinese students who studied physics in the US went back to work on their country's defense and nuclear programs. One could make a case that it would have been better to keep them here. <br /><br />Again, this kind of reverse immigration won't affect top-tier research but it's already affecting bottom and middle tier work. But basically you end up training the competition, and some people might argue that that's worse than retaining these people here. I think globalization has generated a whole new set of dilemmas and it's going to take a few years before we figure out the solutions.Wavefunctionhttp://wavefunction.fieldofscience.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-982136557785592622010-12-14T08:24:02.392-05:002010-12-14T08:24:02.392-05:00A10:00a: I think everyone here agrees that if thos...<i>A10:00a: I think everyone here agrees that if those days ever existed, they are gone now.</i><br /><br />Yes, all of <b>us</b> know, but how do you explain the continual flood of grad students into chem Ph.D programs? Do they know? I'm willing to bet they don't.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-56545233040334520042010-12-14T07:52:11.711-05:002010-12-14T07:52:11.711-05:00"then the company should be willing to take o..."then the company should be willing to take on some "underqualified" staff if they don't actually have to risk money on the new hire. The flip side is that the new hire would most likely have to accept that their fellowship pay isn't going to match that of the ideal candidate. After a year of on the job training this new hire would be fully capable of performing all the functions that the company was originally looking for. Then the fellowship would expire and the person would be hired at the company. "<br /><br />There is a much easier way to do this switch. Apply to a company which is searching for a position for which there is a shortage. Accept that your pay will be lower than if you were doing a job in which you'd be a perfect match. Learn the new field. If you are not given a salary increase after you learn the new field, apply somewhere else.<br /><br />I am learning a new field at a lower salary than I previously had. After a year recruiters are calling off the hook. (Which is even more outstanding when you consider I am not looking for a new position). I don't see why others couldn't do the same. However it takes a great deal of faith and guts to make such a switch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8964719845369935777.post-44548879906357419122010-12-14T07:36:39.211-05:002010-12-14T07:36:39.211-05:00It seems like the future trend is going to be to k...It seems like the future trend is going to be to keep management (all PhDs) and a bunch of students and outsourcing to do the bench work. This is already happening in one group where I work (large pharma co), and the trend is expected to continue. The only BS/MS that they will need are enough to train the students. If this happens in our group, those of us experienced MS who end up on the wrong side of the layoff decision will somehow have to go into another field if they wish to stay in the US, regardless of their nationality. I just heard that one of my former coworkers is now selling real estate, for example. She is a Chinese citizen who didn't want to go back, and she has a family here now. It would be nice if there were more opportunities in the US for chemists, but they are gone to China and not coming back.<br /><br />Alot of us in the mid-30's range and older who were in grad school during the boom times are caught in the middle-can't retire anytime soon, can't get another job in chem if things go bad at our current job, and probably considered too old to retrain and be competitive with the large amount of 20 somethings coming through now. I don't know what the answer is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com