Page 2 of 3

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 1:28 pm
by Dave Jensen
Yandorio wrote:It would be interesting to know what year this was, as the (Biomed) job situation is presently not as rosy as it was ten or fifteen years ago, or haven't you noticed...


It's interesting to note that of my 30 years of recruiting in the biomed arena, only a very few of those years were "gangbuster" years for early career scientists, and they were all more than two decades ago. Since then, it's been about the same. Yandorio, you may have just discovered this, but science is not an easy field (hence, this forum to help out). The funny part about it is that people who move past that "gripe" still seem to find work, and go up the career ladder nonetheless. Sitting at the starting gate complaining about the competition isn't the way to win a horse race.

Dave

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2015 8:18 pm
by RSD
On the topic of the current job market, I've found that in both my current position in a biotech hub, and my previous position in a non-hub city (both in biotech), we had and continue to have trouble finding high quality scientists to fill advertised and non-advertised positions. We aren't looking for super specific skill sets, just good candidates with interest and relevant experience. For talented scientists, the opportunities seem to be there.

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:44 am
by Dave Jensen
RSD wrote:On the topic of the current job market, I've found that in both my current position in a biotech hub, and my previous position in a non-hub city (both in biotech), we had and continue to have trouble finding high quality scientists to fill advertised and non-advertised positions. We aren't looking for super specific skill sets, just good candidates with interest and relevant experience. For talented scientists, the opportunities seem to be there.


Thanks RSD. I hear the same thing from my clients. It's very difficult for employers at times, as well.

Dave

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 7:32 am
by Yaza
Hi All,

As an update: I have requested an increase in my salary and I am still waiting to hear back from them .

If all goes well, my concern now is about personal development in this position. As I mentioned, I already have the technical skills but I will apply them in different settings and could enhance my scientific knowledge. It is a focused work and might get bored quickly. I will provide compounds to the screening team. then make more compounds and screen.. it is a cycle. There will be intellectual input, for sure.

I was thinking maybe I can discuss this with manager but I am afraid it is too late now. The manager might think I am hesitant and decide to move to the next candidate.

Any thoughts please?

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Sun Nov 01, 2015 10:02 pm
by Steven Z.
RSD wrote:On the topic of the current job market, I've found that in both my current position in a biotech hub, and my previous position in a non-hub city (both in biotech), we had and continue to have trouble finding high quality scientists to fill advertised and non-advertised positions. We aren't looking for super specific skill sets, just good candidates with interest and relevant experience. For talented scientists, the opportunities seem to be there.


I personally find that impossible to believe. The scientists I know have more trouble finding work than ex-cons and end up doing rather lousy jobs like adjunct professor, teaching community college, endless post-docs etc.
There are entire blog sites full of scientists commenting on the nightmare that is a job search in this profession.

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 8:39 am
by Steven Z.
My advice to the OP is to take the permanent position. A post-doc is the PhD equivalent of a temp job. Since your current company balked at making you perm that is a pretty good indication they don't value you enough to do so and likely never will. If you suspect the new company is underpaying you you can always keep searching and when you get an even better offer take that. If it were me though I'd take the perm job.

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:36 am
by Dave Jensen
Steven Z. wrote:
RSD wrote:On the topic of the current job market, I've found that in both my current position in a biotech hub, and my previous position in a non-hub city (both in biotech), we had and continue to have trouble finding high quality scientists to fill advertised and non-advertised positions. We aren't looking for super specific skill sets, just good candidates with interest and relevant experience. For talented scientists, the opportunities seem to be there.


I personally find that impossible to believe. The scientists I know have more trouble finding work than ex-cons and end up doing rather lousy jobs like adjunct professor, teaching community college, endless post-docs etc.
There are entire blog sites full of scientists commenting on the nightmare that is a job search in this profession.


Steven,

I totally agree with RSD and have had dozens of clients tell me this, over and over again. I'm working on a plain vanilla position now in Seattle and can't find what we're looking for, either. (Protein or peptide chemist, coming out of 4-5 years of postdoc), The client wants a productive person, of course, so a few relevant publications are important, but that's just a normal requirement. It's much harder to find scientists than you and your blogs think it is, that's for sure. This is likely because there are 300-400 niches inside just the life sciences . . . Each of those has a job market, and the level of demand varies in these tremendously.

People who have "soured" on their opportunities close doors mentally (they forget how to job search, they don't take advice -- they plop out a few CV's directed to ads and the non-response validates their position), and if they do land an opportunity, the "sourness" is detected by others in the interviewing process and their chances go south there as well. It's a vicious circle.

Dave

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 12:22 pm
by PG
The job market seem to hae improved. We are seeing lower number of applicants to advertised positions and also that candidates have an easier time finding other positions. This seem to be true especially for project leaders and people with some years of experience but it is a difference as compared to a couple of years ago.

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 1:26 pm
by Steven Z.
Ah I see 4-5 year post-doc.

That is going to be a tough sell telling a smart young student If you just endure 4-5 years undergrad, followed by 5-7 years of grad school, followed by 4-5 years post-doc you just may have a chance at a somewhat decent job maybe (or you maybe you will join the chorus of unemployed scientists on Chemjobber, In the Pipeline and elsewhere).

That was exactly why I got off at the MS level. I am not waiting until I am 40 to maybe, no real guarantee, have a chance at a job I could have gotten much simpler with any professional oriented MS in 2 years.

I'll also go out on a limb and say your clients aren't interested in any of the 100,000 or so 45+ year old scientists that pharma tossed out on the street over the past decade.

That is not a shortage. That is insane demands, a dysfunctional career, and compounded by purple squirrel.

Re: Shall I accept this permanent position?

PostPosted: Mon Nov 02, 2015 2:23 pm
by PG
A postdoc isnt the same as work experience and you dont need to do a 4 year postdoc to get an entry level position. My statement was that the labour market (Northern Europe) have improved significantly as compared to a few years ago and that the improvement seem to be especially for people with for example industry experience as project leaders.

As for the interest of people from big pharma it depends on the position. For entry level laboratory positions they are usually not of interest for us for various reasons while we have recruited a number of people from pharma to positions that deal with clinical trials, regulatory affairs etc.