Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I admit to not knowing much about the chemistry job market. We employ very few chemists where I work and they are all doing routine lab work (QC lab mostly). They really don't do "science" or even highly detailed analysis, so I have no basis to compare to other chemistry jobs out there. The vast majority of our technical staff are physics and engineering (ME, AE, EE mostly) but for them pay seems to range between around $60K for entry to $120/130K for the key experts. Even so we have a hard time hiring because those ranges are not competitive for new hires with the skills we need.
Would y'all mind explaining what it is chemists do that prevents them receiving the same level of pay as other STEM fields? Are most chem jobs like ours (mostly repetitive labs) or more research? Just trying to understand the chemistry market since it seems very different from the one I know.
You are right that most chemist jobs out there are mudane Quality Control Work. What is happening in the chemistry job market is a lot of entry level chemist positions are getting replaced with "lab technician" type work.
Most entry level chemistry jobs are now just routine grunt work thus the low pay ($15 per hour as a temp/contractor). Granted I only have a BS in chemistry and it can be tough to advance to a formulation chemist or research and development chemist position without a PH.D. in chemistry but I still think it is ridiculous that the profession is trending to lab technician type work.
I am an analytical chemist for a pharmacetuicals company and do stability testing on transdermal patches by extracting the contents of the patch in dissolution. Taking the samples and preparing mobile phases for HPLC to determine the % of active ingredients in the patch from HPLC analysis. This work also gets repetitive but there is room for advancement into a research scientist position validating new methods for new drugs.
The issue now is most entry level chemist positions are called lab technician now doing basic testing on samples which means most entry level science jobs pay technician wages ($15 per hour. $20 per hour if your lucky).
90% of the chemist positions out there are either quality control or Analytical base. Analytical is slightly better than quality control. True research and development chemist/scientist positions when scientists lead innovative projects are rare which is making chemistry a dead profession.
Last edited by Poor Chemist; 01-25-2016 at 09:11 PM..
Isn't it because a chemistry degree isn't specific to pharmaceutical work? A pharm chem degree seems more appropriate for that line of work.
Just pointing out that with broad degrees, it applies to a wide variety of work but then it takes a more specific degree to advance up. Traditionally people go back to get masters at this point... once they are in the field and need it to move up
Like mine in med technology, I can move to supervisor but it gets harder to move past without a masters later on, but the employer will help pay for it when I get there in a few years time. Well it would be hard to promote without masters since I wouldn't be as competitive as one with it. But that is gs 13 and up so I will probably be in my 30s before that comes.
Thank you. That does help answer the question. So essentially most positions that are listed as chemist are really just lab tech. I'm not in the chemistry industry so yes, the few we have are doing cook book QC work running the same process several times a day.
Depressing salaries is not the main purpose of hiring H1B's. They often get the same salary as American workers, but work twice as many hours for that salary. And they're a lot less likely to leave for a better job, because other companies are less likely to hire them because of the paperwork. In STEM it's often very valuable to the employer to have some confidence that their STEM employees are not going to suddenly leave for better jobs. From the employer's point of view, that makes them better employees. More dedicated and more productive. Because, working twice as many hours, they often get almost twice as much work done. So it's a double bonus for employers. More reliability, in not leaving the job, and more productivity, in working twice as many hours for the same salary.
That's basically the reasoning of my now former employer. They have hired a disproportionate amount of H-1Bs. There has really been little technical difference in the quality of employees outside just a general bell curve, but the H-1Bs are a lot more willing to put up with garbage because they are essentially hostage.
I walked on a few days notice because I had better employment lined up. For the H-1Bs, it's going to be tougher given the administration required, all things equal.
Thank you. That does help answer the question. So essentially most positions that are listed as chemist are really just lab tech. I'm not in the chemistry industry so yes, the few we have are doing cook book QC work running the same process several times a day.
Most Chemist jobs are analytical of varying complexities. It is not easy to send samples to China/India for testing especially biological material that is perishable. Some places only really require someone who can use push button instruments, other places need to be able to adapt methods to a large variety of types of samples and use complex instrumentation like GC/MS, LC/MS, ICP, CE.
Most Chemist jobs are analytical of varying complexities. It is not easy to send samples to China/India for testing especially biological material that is perishable. Some places only really require someone who can use push button instruments, other places need to be able to adapt methods to a large variety of types of samples and use complex instrumentation like GC/MS, LC/MS, ICP, CE.
sounds like my job but with solely biological samples. Keeps job from being off shored, and if outsourced, I just go work at that lab. Plus docs don't like having to wait too long for important tests so it can't be sent too far away, keeps the jobs at least local
At some point the government will be forced to allow more immigrant workers here on work visa because there are too few Americans that can do the work.
There's too few foreigners who can do the work, too. I work mostly with these "highly skilled" foreigners here on H1Bs or with our offshore team who didn't even have to leave their hometown to steal American jobs.
Most of what I do involves:
1.) Pointing out their mistakes
2.) Advising them how to avoid those mistakes in the future
3.) Cleaning up after them when they try repeatedly to remedy their mistakes, but fail every time
4.) Correcting their incorrect assumptions about a project because they didn't bother to read the documentation
5.) Answering the same questions over and over
Etc., etc., etc.
These people are effing useless. They really are. My job would be easier and our team would be more productive if we fired half of them right now.
careful, if they catch on that it is same questions, they will just make a manual and eliminate the job and just direct future questions to manual. Customer service jobs seemed to follow this model because I get the same "options" when I call for help.
True research and development chemist/scientist positions when scientists lead innovative projects are rare which is making chemistry a dead profession.
I don't know, moving to the scientist position has its own set of problems. From a QC level to a scientist position, your contract extends from yearly to every 5-6 years. Non tenured academia (national labs, research centers) and perhaps some industry positions have this problem. At the end of 5-6 years, your project is up for renewal and its a thumbs up (you get another 5-6 years), or a thumbs down (your project is cut, you're out, or your budget gets cut and you get moved to the basement office). Sure you get great fringe benefits, but having to constantly prove yourself or you work for the entire time can be tiring.
If it were me, I'd probably put it up with about 2-3 cycles (say 12-15 years) before I'm either exhausted of ideas and too specialized to find work.
Perhaps by then it's consulting on the side or opening a business not in science.
careful, if they catch on that it is same questions, they will just make a manual and eliminate the job and just direct future questions to manual. Customer service jobs seemed to follow this model because I get the same "options" when I call for help.
Er no...these questions are project-related. These are QA people asking me these questions. I'm a developer. They can't make a manual that would answer these questions. [They] just need to learn how to write stuff down.
Last edited by PJSaturn; 01-26-2016 at 02:06 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but with solely biological samples. Keeps job from being off shored, and if outsourced, I just go work at that lab. Plus docs don't like having to wait too long for important tests so it can't be sent too far away, keeps the jobs at least local
