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.
Actually, I am the only one of three brothers with a college degree and both are doing better than I am with one, much to my embarrassment.
And in what way does that conflict with what I said? Your current salary is very much on the high end for someone without a degree or professional training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
Well I'm not going to build a portfolio of skills because no one will hire me to do something I haven't already done before.
You have an almost communist idea of career placement, that is that all one needs to do is X, Y, Z and then they get job A regardless of your particular talents and effort. That is not how things work in a capitalist economy, so you can either move to Cuba or start figuring out how to navigate the labor market. What you are confronting now is the fact that, with the exception of being born into the "right family", success is directly correlated to your particular talents and drive to succeed.
You may want to think how both of your brothers, who share a common background, were able to do better than you. Of course, you are going to naturally blame it on chemistry and big evil corporation rather than a difference in character, drive, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
In any case my point of starting this thread is not to debate whether I should leave the field but rather to collect information as to whether I could get hired and build a career in something without going back to school and at least get a job with benefits and a reasonable middle class salary 50k+ even If I take a hit in the beginning.
And the answer is an emphatic yes. But you're going to have to deal with the same issues that you think are impossible to deal with 2-3 fold. Namely, trying to get a job in a field when you lack real experience in the field.
So guess you'll just have to go back to school and deal with these same issues in another 2~4 years. And just think, you can just repeat the cycle again and again and never confront your actual issues.
You say you can network and career-switch without an MBA. Sure. But it is much much easier with a top MBA.
That's like saying you can go into the NFL without being drafted. Sure, but it's much easier if you are.
No, its not like saying that it all. A MBA from a top-school will certainly open a number of doors, but doing it without such is not all that uncommon.
I'm not even sure what you mean by "career-switch" though, the sorts of careers a MBA is likely to switch to is pretty limited. There are other degrees that are more flexible.
MSchemist, are you currently involved in any volunteer work? This is a shot in the dark, but I volunteered at my local museum of science for several months while I was in school. It can be a place to make contacts. Several of my fellow volunteers were retired physicians and scientists and the folk that ran the department I was in were obviously scientists as well. I got to know a lot of people while I was there. I didn't need to draw on those connections, but it's something to consider. Welcome to The Museum of Science and Industry
You have an almost communist idea of career placement, that is that all one needs to do is X, Y, Z and then they get job A regardless of your particular talents and effort.
No i think that if you have a Chemistry degree and at least some of the necessary skills you should at least be interviewed for an entry level position and given the chance to grow and be promoted. A bright chemist can learn new skills quickly and be able to research what he needs to know for a job in any particular area. However, companies seem to have learned absolutely nothing from this recession and are continuing in their short-sighted imbecilic scorched earth policies. Rather than develop employees they try to steal them from other companies. That will eventially come back to bite them.
What I find truely communist is all these companies asking for bail outs from congress for their stupid behavior, particularly the science and technology companies going to congress and whining that they can't get American science and tech workers and need more h1-b's. They aren't even looking to hire American workers and they certainly aren't doing a darn thing to attract and develop them. If anything their practices are driving Americans out of STEM careers.
However, I do understand your point that the hiring system is geared towards hiring well connected rather than well qualified individuals. I personally think that is a major dysfunction that hurts companies and workers alike. However, if what you say is true and what I am seeing is lower tier companies placing ads and shopping for suckers to accept low-ball wages I guess I will have to learn to play the game.
No i think that if you have a Chemistry degree and at least some of the necessary skills you should at least be interviewed for an entry level position and given the chance to grow and be promoted.
Right and here you are thinking of a communist style economy. In a capitalist economy why should you be given these chances irrespective of the supply of labor and demand for such labor?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchemist80
However, I do understand your point that the hiring system is geared towards hiring well connected rather than well qualified individuals. I personally think that is a major dysfunction that hurts companies and workers alike.
This is not my point, employers are interested in getting the most qualified individuals possible. Why in the world would they want anything else?! Makes no sense. The problem here is that people don't where signs on their forehead that tell employers how good they are, the employers have to use a variety of methods to try to hire the best possible applicants. One obvious method is to simply ask people you know and trust if they can refer someone that would be appropriate for the job. A lot of jobs are filled this way and hence the importance of having connections.
You interpret this to mean that the connections are more important than the qualifications, but that is rubbish. Rather the employers are using social networks to try to locate the best talent for the job. Not being in those networks puts you at a competitive disadvantage. But most people do create many of these connections in school and this is one way going to a low/mid ranked public university can put you at a disadvantage in the work place. In this environment you're really just a number and are pushed through the system without much regard. Trying to development these networks outside of school and the workplace can be difficult, but not impossible.
But with that said, no method is going to work perfectly. The sort of trial and error system you seem to have in mind is way too costly for businesses. A business needs to be reasonably sure someone is a good candidate before they hire them. The job hunting tasks is all about trying to convince some company that you are going to be a great fit for their company. It really does not sound like you are doing that, it sounds like you are just sending out generic applications.
Right and here you are thinking of a communist style economy. In a capitalist economy why should you be given these chances irrespective of the supply of labor and demand for such labor?
No communism intended. If companies want to act foolish, ignore promising and qualified potential employees that send them a resume they have a right. I just don't want to see their lying/stupid faces in front of congress saying they can't find American scientists and want to lift the caps on H1-b's.
The market works, just not when companies use immigration policy to manipulate the market and flood the country with third world applicants that can live like royalty back home with 20k a year and are happy to work for that. That is communism, or at least socialism using the government to control the market/supply.
If the supply wasn't being artificially inflated by the H1b program they would not be able to get away with paying scientists sub-$20/hour. Although they are forced to pay an h1b a comparably salary to an american by law, the mere fact that they are here distorts what the market is. Also, they only have to point to an american even in the bottom 1% of salaries who is making the same salary.
I think one of three things will happen in the future either the cap on H1b's will be lifted and wages in science will continue to decline to the point where no native born americans will want to go into science, science will be out sourced with the same result, or it will stop and wages will recover. I am not hopeful about the last option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id
But with that said, no method is going to work perfectly. The sort of trial and error system you seem to have in mind is way too costly for businesses. A business needs to be reasonably sure someone is a good candidate before they hire them.
The current system definitely falls short of accomplishing this. Hiring someone who's a friend of a friend of a manager or someone who happens to work there is not a great way to get the best quality candidate. Also, from what I've seen from the way human resources operates they select for the best BSer.
They give a laundry list of ridiculously specific criteria to an HR person with often no scientific background and they accordingly toss all the resumes in the trash who don't have everything on the list. I suspect in many cases it's all of the resumes and like you say they go with someone who has connections.
Then they conduct the interview with the same old trite questions and amateur/voodoo psychological profiling like what is your greatest weakness. Where do you see yourself in five years. This selects for the best liar/BSer of someone who memorized the list. I read a stat that when HR does the hiring the chances of a successful hire are 30% less than randomly picking someone without an interview.
Basically, until I happen to meet someone who can set me up with a decent company, I am stuck dealing with bottom feeding/low-balling lower tier companies. There has got to be a better way. It seems quite wasteful that I may end up in a different field simply because I happen to know someone who can get me a job there.
I still do not see how the salary surveys can be correct when so many companies seem to be paying in the lowest 10%. Median means 1/2 the companies should be paying more and 1/2 less.
Last edited by MSchemist80; 05-01-2010 at 07:32 PM..
MSchemist80, I agree with you about HR. Sending HR CVs is probably useless. I call it the HR black hole abyss. As I said pages ago, it really sounds like it's a location problem for you. My company, an international co, recently announced job losses and a revamping agenda. 20% of sales jobs in the US are going to be cut. They are transferring funds to R&D. Bad news for marketing, good news for scientists.
I also know, through personal experience with a few contractors at my co, that they are not hiring those with visas. Based on what I learned there is some kind of investment required. I think it's 5-10k/yr for those with visas. These folk aren't getting the perm positions. I've watched two get passed by and they're fine scientists. I don't know if R&D will be a secure career in the US long term, but as long as our uni's hold it looks like we'll be ok. I say this because I've been asking around as to why our co stays in the US since we have sites all over the world. Harvard, MIT, etc aren't all over the world. It's too bad you cannot move. A couple of years ago you would have been fine in Boston. I hear it's getting more competative now.
This kind of follows the 50k without a degree thread.
..
I have an MS degree in chemistry as my name suggests. I find that the kind of jobs that specifically utilize my degree [Lab jobs] often pay worse than if I never went to college at all [sub 40k]. I am not looking for six figures but I at least want a middle class salary and a career.
What kind of jobs are out there that hire people with a science degree but are not science based? I am considering going back to school for an MSA and becoming an accountant but consider that a last resort I would rather not have another 2 years of minimal income plus tuition. Any suggestion [other than sales I hate sales too and am not an aggressive person].
Have you considered working for the military as a civilian employee (I suppose that would make you a consultant) Or how about the Centers for Disease Control. There would probably be some stability there for you with benefits, and you can sometimes promote easily within a civil service system.
It's not so much that I don't want to relocate. At this point I'd be open to it. The places that are more promising are not places I'd want to live.
The Northeast is cold and snowy, even more than Chicago, fairly expensive to live, and I have no family at all there so I'd be miserable all winter. I like outdoor activities especially bicycling and hate the cold. At least in Chicago I have family.
California is totally out of control, especially the govt there, as well as the insane cost of living and of course the fires and earthquakes. Even if I'd make 15k more it would still be a pay cut in terms of living standard.
One area I am looking into is the triangle in NC.
There are plenty of reputable companies near by that I can work at. If their HR departments are screening out all the quality candidates than I guess we can all pity them for their incompetence. I really think 2/4 of the problems in the economy today are greedy and amoral execs, 1/4 incompetent HR/hiring and 1/4 bad circumstances.
I enjoy science but if it's a choice between living in near poverty for the rest of my life or living in a place where I'd be miserable well that's just no choice really.
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.
