Everything You Need to Know About Hiring Contractors

While I spend most of my time as a freelancer, I sometimes will do contract work because the pay is good and the hours are reasonable. As many of you know by now, using contractors rather than hiring new employees has become the new way of controlling costs and keeping the full time headcount low. After all, paying someone an hour wage without covering insurance and other employee benefits costs can be huge savings to companies trying to maintain competitiveness and cut costs.

During my various stints as a contract employee, I learned that the rules governing the hiring of contractors vary widely from company to company and agency to agency. Consequently, there are a lot of myths, urban legends and misinformation regarding hiring contractors and the obligations of employers to them. Admittedly, I am a bit confused about the rules surrounding hiring and employing contractors despite the fact that I have been a contractor on more than three occasions. 

For those of you who may be confused as me or others who simply want to learn more about contracting, I highly recommend an article by Katherine Reynolds Lewis in the small business section of the NY Times entitled “Hiring Contractors Without Getting Into Trouble.”

The article offers a comprehensive overview of the Federal laws governing contractor hiring practices, the challenges of a contractor workforce and how to maximize the effectiveness of contract employees. Despite its obvious employer bias, it does paint a realistic view of what persons interested in contract work will likely encounter in the workplace.

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!

 

Abbott Slashes 700 Jobs From Its Medical Devices and Diagnostics Unit

Chicago-based Abbott Laboratories today announced that it would lay off 700 employees from its medical devices and diagnostics division as part of an ongoing restructuring effort. 

Most of the layoffs will take place in the Chicago area and affect employees that manufacture the company’s cardiovascular stents and diagnostic tests. According to a company spokesperson approximately 500 persons who work in stent manufacturing and 200 who work in diagnostics will lose their jobs.

The restructuring of Abbott’s manufacturing operations began several years ago and about this time last year the company layed off about 1,900 employees in Lake County, Illinois.

In October, Abbott surprised investors and analysts with the announcement that it would spin off its branded drug business, including Humira (psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis) it’s largest selling branded pharmaceutical product. Company executives argued that the split would allow stakeholders and investors to separately and more accurately value Abbott’s other less risky businesses which include nutritional (baby) formula, generic drugs and medical devices and diagnostics.

Despite signs of economic recovery, it appears that layoffs are still occurring at a pretty good clip at many pharma and biotech companies. It now appears that medical devices and diagnostic company employees, who were once immune to downsizing and reorganization, are now fair game.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Pharma Layoffs Decline As Biotech Layoffs Rise

This past holiday season, as usual, was rife with massive layoffs and downsizing at various big pharma companies. Interestingly, in 2011, most biotechnology companies were able to weather the economic downturn and layoffs were not typical. Sadly, 2012 looks to be a more challenging year for many biotechnology company employees.

In the past week or so, several relatively high profile public biotechnology companies announced layoffs. First, on January 5, XOMA, the long- struggling California-based biotechnology company issued a press release indicating its intention to reorganize to focus it financial resources on its lead product gevokizumab and the company’s unique antibody discovery and development capabilities. The reorganization will result in elimination of 84 positions (34% of its workforce) with 50 jobs being lost immediately and the remainder by the end of the first quarter of this year. The layoffs will save the company $14 million. The same day, Winnipeg-based Cangene Corp, one of Canada’s oldest and largest biotechnology company announced that it would eliminate 120 jobs or 17% of its current workforce.  Finally, today, Human Genome Sciences (HGS) announced at the annual JP Morgan conference in San Francisco announced plans to eliminate 150 jobs across multiple departments.

The HGS announcement was somewhat surprising because the company recently received approval for a pioneering systemic lupus erythematous drug called Benlysta. Apparently, poor Benlysta sales have battered the company’s stock price which resulted in the announced layoffs. HGS reported Benlysta sales of a slightly more than $25 million in the fourth quarter which were must less than analysts had originally predicted.

Although these layoffs may be troubling to some, it is important to note that each of  the three companies have been in existence for 20 years or more and are transitioning from research organizations into companies that are finally commercializing their products. Like it or not, companies with commercial products are held to higher standards and receive much greater scrutiny than start ups and early stage companies. That said, while there may be additional layoffs at some older more established biotechnology companies, it may be a good time to start a company. Word on the street suggests that there is a lot of investment capital out there for new start ups!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

 

Preparing For and Coping With Annual Performance Reviews

For many corporate employees, the annual performance review process is a bane to their existence. For those of you who may not be familiar with annual reviews, most corporate employees are required to undergo a review process that includes a synopsis of their accomplishments over the past year and new goals for the upcoming one. And, as all corporate employees understand, the quality of an annual review determines the size of the bonus that they can expect to receive and whether or not a salary increase is in order for the upcoming fiscal year. In other words, you never want to get a “less than stellar” annual review because your fiscal well-being depends on it!

Not surprisingly, preparing for the annual review can be nerve-racking and dealing with the results of the review can be equally challenge (especially if the review is a negative one). Although, most of the annual reviews for 2011 have been completed, Eilene Zimmerman who writes the Career Couch for the New Times posted a helpful article that deals with preparing for the dreaded annual review and how best to respond to either a positive or negative one.

I can tell you from personal experience, the annual review is probably one of the silliest and most inane things that was ever invented for corporate employees. That said, it is part and parcel of the corporate workplace game and to excel you need to get good at!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

Improving Employment Opportunities for Life Sciences Graduates

There are a variety of reasons why the life sciences job market has been so dismal in recent years. First and foremost, there are too many applicants for too few jobs; employers are ignoring resumes/CVs that previously commanded face-to-face interviews. Second and perhaps more pernicious, is the notion among corporate executives and hiring managers that current graduates (both undergraduate and graduate students) have been catered to and are so academically untested that they bring little or no value to today’s fast-paced and demanding workplaces. While this characterization may or may not be warranted, it is a prevailing attitude that is likely hindering employment opportunities for recent life sciences graduates.

According to an insightful article written by Robert W. Goldfarb, a management consultant, entitled “Help Graduates Find Their Footing” in the past, senior hiring managers were willing to hire applicants that thought outside of the box or were a bit unconventional to bring in new ideas and create some chaos in quiet office environments. But Goldfarb asserts, that long, painful and largely unsuccessful job searches “have sapped their daring, creativity and willingness to challenge old procedures.” Further he believes that older employees, once extremely resistant to change, are much more willing to reinvent themselves by adapting to a technically-challenging workplace and bringing mature problem solving skills to the job to protect their jobs and 401K plans. Because of this, Goldfarb contends that “managers have become far less tolerant of the missteps that once expected of any new hires” and not surprisingly older workers make mistakes. Finally, previously supportive hiring managers, criticize recent graduates for poor quality written and oral reports and the inability to recognize trends or draw conclusions from masses of data. 

So what can be done to ensure that the current generation of college graduates does not remain unemployed into perpetuity? Goldfarb suggests that mentoring and building partnerships between recent college graduates and companies that want to hire them would be an important first step toward fixing the problem. He suggests that companies should consider investing in training programs designed to shape the employees that they ultimately will need for their businesses. For example, Goldfarb suggests that:

 “high potential graduates for whom there isn’t an immediate opening could be hired, not as unpaid interns but as salaried trainees given three to six months to prove their value in a series of assignments. Those who don’t seize the opportunity can quickly be dismissed.

Also, he suggests that trainees must be mentored to help them avoid the “small missteps that can damage a career before it starts.” Interesting, back in the 70s and 80s most major corporation had training programs in place. These were largely abandoned in the 90s as a result of global competition and increasing US labor costs.

Goldfarb’s plan requires companies to think strategically, and plan for their employment needs of the future. Sadly, as many of you already know, must companies focus on the short term and are not mindful of future needs; after all they are someone else’s problems to solve). But, in response to this attitude, Goldfarb offers this dire warning:

“Employers can keep faulting overindulgent parents, ineffectual teachers, colleges without required subjects and graduates unsuited to today’s complex workplace or they can play a greater role in training and developing a generation longing to take its place in the American mainstream.”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

 

Debunking the Myth That There is a Shortage of Qualified American Life Sciences Employees

Despite the fact the US unemployment rate has hovered around 9.0 percent for the past several years and over 200,000 pharmaceutical employees have lost their jobs since 2001, many life sciences executives contend that they cannot find qualified employees to fill job openings at their companies. Most executives blame the US education system for not providing prospective employees with necessary training and immigration laws that prevent companies from hiring highly-skilled foreign workers. According to a recent survey conducted by the staffing company ManpowerGroup, over 52% of US employers that they have difficulty filling open positions because of talent shortages.  Some other revealing statistics about employer’s attitudes include:

  • 47% of employers blame job candidates’ lack of hard job or technical skills for their inability to hire
  • 35% of companies cite job candidates’ lack of experience as a reason not to hire
  • 25% blame lack of business knowledge or formal educational qualification as a deterrent to hiring

While a majority of US corporate executives may believe this, the reality is that employers simply cannot find employees to accept jobs at the wages that they are willing to offer! In other words, there is a plethora of skilled American workers out there; but many US employers are willing to outsource or hire skilled foreign nationals who frequently work for lower wages than most Americans. Further, American employers are unwilling to spend money to train college graduates or re-train existing employees who may be able to step into these so-called difficult-to-fill positions. This may help to explain why an increasing number of students are willing to accept unpaid internships or, in some cases pay to work at companies for free to garner valuable industrial experience which may ultimately lead to a job.

In a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, Peter Cappelli, the George W. Taylor Professor of Management at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, offered three possible solutions to the current American unemployment conundrum

Work with education providers

If job candidates lack the skills or qualifications to do certain jobs, companies ought to make them go to school to acquire them. To that end, a growing number of community colleges in North Carolina and New Jersey have partnered with prospective employers to develop courses or degree programs tailored to meet their employment needs. For example, about 10 years ago my local community college (Mercer County College) developed a program (in a partnership with the clinical research company Covance) to train students interested in becoming clinical research assistants and managers. Not surprisingly, many of the students enrolled in the program ultimately where hired by Covance. 

In another variation of this model, extant employees, who may be interested in advancing their cares, would be able take classes at local community colleges (in off hours) and have their tuition subsidized via company tuition reimbursement programs. This would help to obviate the high costs and inordinate amount of time typically required to hire external candidates for newly created positions.

Reintroduce on-the-job training programs

Back in the day, companies tended to hire persons who were the brightest, most talented and most likely to benefit an organization.  New hires were required to participate in internal training programs so that they would better understand their positions and allow management to best evaluate new talent. Generally speaking, this allowed most companies to operate more efficiently; mainly because this allowed managers to determine the best fit of new hires into the existing corporate structure. Sadly this is no longer the case at most companies. These days, companies tend to hire worker who possess the technical skills and qualifications to do a certain job and are expected to “hit the ground running” Put simply, short term needs are placed before the long term needs and future success of an organization.

Promote from within

According to data from the talent management company Taleo Corp., in recent years a surprising two-thirds of job vacancies, even in larger companies, have been filled by outside hires. While it may be cheaper to hiring from the outside, the loss of experienced workers and historical corporate knowledge may affect a company’s performance and ultimately its bottom line.

While the US economy is beginning to show signs that it is beginning to recover, I believe that surest way to prosperity is to put Americans back to work. Although this may require a substantial financial investment by US corporations, we simply can no longer rely on outsourcing or a cheaper immigrant workforce to allow American to continue to compete on the world stage.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

Tis the Season: How to Ask for a Raise Without Getting Fired!

While many of you are happy just because you have a job, there are those individuals (deserving or not) who are going to “bite the bullet” and ask for a raise. This makes sense because over the past few years the cost of health insurance has gone up along with college tuition, gasoline price and a variety of other things while salaries have all but stagnated. Interestingly, only 9 percent of companies have put pay freezes in place over the past 18 months; a rate this is consistent with historical standards. That is down from the nearly two-thirds of companies that imposed pay freezes in January 2010. In other words, now may be a good time to ask for a raise as companies are trying to retain high value employees who presumably were too vital to lay off when companies were downsizing over the past three years. Sadly, merit raises (when they are meted out) have precipitously dropped in recent years from an average of roughly 4-5 percent to a paltry 2 percent on average today.

Whether or not economic times are good or bad, it is hard for most employees to “ask for a raise.” This is because it is difficult for employees to determine if they are ‘worthy” of a raise. To that end, there was a fantastic article in the NY Times business section last week helps employees determine whether or not they are deserving of a raise and it also provides a road map to actually prepare and ultimately ask for a raise.

It is a great read and provides great insights and ideas for those willing to risk asking their bosses for raises in difficult economic times.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

Big Changes In Store For Amgen Employees?

Remember when Amgen was the world’s largest and most profitable biotechnology company? That was way back in 2006 before its marketing and sales team got in trouble for “pushing” the sale of its erythropoietin (EPO) product Epogen and Aranesp beyond acceptable patient safety limits. This, along with a relatively thin new drug pipeline, has for the past five years or so relegated the company to second tier biotech company status.

To make matter worse, a company spokesperson mentioned its third-quarter earnings conference call today that the company is

 “...currently evaluating some changes within our Research & Development organization to improve focus and to reallocate resources to key pipeline assets and activities." This typically means that the possibility of layoffs is real. The last major restructuring of the company took place in 2007 and it resulted in the elimination of more than 2,000 jobs worldwide, including about 700 in Thousand Oaks.

This past June, Amgen announced plans to eliminate 134 jobs at two of its manufacturing sites in Colorado.

The company employs about 17,000 people, including about 6,200 in Thousand Oaks. Amgen also has research and development facilities in Thousand Oaks, South San Francisco,; Cambridge and Woburn, Mass.; Seattle; Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada; Abingdon, Cambridge and Uxbridge, Great Britain; and Regensburg, Germany.

In 2010, Amgen's revenue totaled $15.1 billion, while research and development cost $2.9 billion, according to the company. Its net profit last year totaled $4.63 billion, up slightly less than 1 percent from 2009.

Could this signal the beginning of the end of this once formidable biotechnology giant? If I was an Amgen employee I would be feverishly updating my CV right about now!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!

 

Are Pharma Layoffs Over?

From 2001 to present, roughly 300,000 pharmaceutical employees have lost their jobs. That is a massive number; second only to the job losses in the automotive and financial services industries. The main reasons for the layoffs have been a lack of return on investment on R&D activities and impending patent cliffs in 2013 for as many as 15 blockbuster drugs. 

Ed Silverman who runs the Pharmalot blog speculated in a post yesterday that the number of pharma layoffs may be dwindling. His assertions are based on an analysis of the annual number of pharma layoffs provided by the outplacement firm of Challenger, Gray and Christmas. Ed’s wrote:

 “So far this year, pharma layoffs have totaled 19,076, and this includes the 13,000 job cuts planned by Merck, which is actually eyeing many foreign positions, therefore, swelling the latest tally. Last year, pharma eliminated 53,636 jobs, down from 61,109 in 2009, when annual layoffs peaked. In fact, the 2009 bloodletting was outsized compared with every other year - the next highest annual layoff tally occurred in 2008, when 43,014 industry cuts were announced. Between 2003 and 2007, the number of jobs that were eliminated ranged from about 15,000 to 31,000 annually, according to the firm.”

This led Ed to posit that the worst may be over and those pharma employees who still have jobs may be able to relax a bit. However, it is important to note (as Ed also points out) that many big companies are still purchasing or opening new  R&D and manufacturing facilities in emerging markets like India and China and more and more R&D jobs are being outsourced. Further, while many US pharma reps have lost their jobs hiring reps in emerging markets continues to explode. Interestingly jobs that are in demand and still available to Americans include those in regulatory affairs, compliance, IT, clinical operations and marketing. Unfortunately, these are very specialized jobs and many of those pharma employees who have been layed off lack the requisite skills to compete for those jobs!

While I think we may have seen the last of massive layoff in big pharma, smaller and less publicized layoffs will likely continue at many US life sciences companies. The downsizing trend taking place in America will likely continue until drug pipelines are populated with new candidates and life science executive realize that outsourcing R&D job is not a viable solution for their productivity problems.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Why Big Mergers Are Never Good For Pharmaceutical Company Employees

The Pharmalot Blog today reported that a Wall Street Journal article indicated that Pfizer is planning to cut $1.0 billion from its operating budget by 2012. As many of you may recall (especially those who lost their jobs) the world’s largest pharmaceutical company cut 1,100 earlier this year at its research facilities in Groton CT. The new cuts are aimed at reducing Pfizer’s R&D expenses by up to $2.9 billion annually.

The $1.0 billion in cuts is primarily aimed at reducing administrative and management duplications at Pfizer’s headquarters in NYC and worldwide. Other expenses to be trimmed include those related to promotions, travel, entertainment, consultants, print materials and supplies and electronic equipment. While there is no doubt that these cuts will help to control costs, I suspect that substantially more money could be saved if pharma executive salaries and bonuses were also trimmed.

While it is unclear what the additional $1.0 billion in cuts will have on scientists, I suspect it won’t be good. In case you have not noticed by now, Pfizer like many of its competitors are getting out of the R&D business. This means that R&D jobs will continue to dwindle and scientists will continue to struggle to find jobs in a highly competitive job market.

Since Pfizer purchased rival Wyeth Pharmaceuticals in 2009, the company has shed over 20,000 jobs. The reason for the job cuts and massive cost cutting measures at Pfizer is the loss of patent protection in 2012 for its top selling cholesterol medication Lipitor ($10.7 billion in sales) and its ED drug Viagra ($1.9 billion in sales). Last year Pfizer lost patent protection the antidepressant Effexor (peak sales of $3.8 billion) and the Alzheimer’s drug Aricept ($417 million in sales). Also, when mergers take place there is much overlap and duplication of effort that takes several years to sort out.

Don’t be surprised if new Pfizer job cuts are announced late next fall! Now, would be a good time for Pfizer scientists to remove the dust from their CVs; if it is not already too late!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

 

Pharma and Biotech Job Watch

Merck & Co, which yesterday completed its $430 million acquisition of Inspire Pharmaceuticals, announced that it intends to shut down Inspire’s headquarters in Raleigh, NC. According to a Merck spokesperson closure of the former Inspire site will occur before the end of the year and their will be job losses. However, it is not clear at present how many jobs will be lost but both executive and workforce positions are on the chopping block. 

Inspire was founded at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill in1995 and went public in 2000. The company employed 240 workers at the beginning of 2011 but it cut 27 percent of its workforce in February after an experimental treatment for cystic fibrosis failed in clinical trials. Merck’s acquisition of Inspire gives the company AzaSite an approved treatment for pink eye and a treatment for dry that is approved in Japan (the drug failed to gain US regulatory approval).

In other industry news, Connecticut-based Alexion announced that it will add 20,000 sq feet of laboratory and office space to its Smithfield, RI location. The company currently employs 125 workers and plans to expand its workforce by 35 percent in the next year or so. Alexion has one approved prescription medication called Soliris, the only approved therapy for persons with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglboinuria (PNH) an orphan indication.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

Career Advice: Be Careful What You Publish on the Internet

For the past few years, I have been warning jobseekers to be careful about what they post to Facebook, Twitter and other social media platforms. This is because many professional recruiters and employers routinely scour social media sites and conduct Google searches on job applicants and to vet prospective new hires. There is nothing more likely to kill a job offer than a photo of a drunken job candidate holding a bottle of Jagermeister or one that depicts a candidate in lingerie or a compromising sexual position. Unfortunately, information posted to the Web has a tendency to exist into perpetuity whether you want it to or not! In other words, once it is published it may not be possible to remove or retrieve the offending material.

While the inability to erase one’s digital past was once mainly a problem of younger and college age persons, the growing use of social media by older individuals has catapulted the problem into the mainstream. Many older adults and celebrities involved in divorces, lawsuits and sensitive business transactions are increasingly finding it difficult to escape their digital past unscathed.

It is possible for those who are haunted by unflattering tags in Facebook photos or ill-advised tweets to “clean up” their reputations themselves. However, this can be an extremely labor intensive and anxiety ridden undertaking, which in many cases —due to the sheer volume of Facebook updates, tweets, Flickr photos and blog posts—might not be successful. This has resulted in the creation of a new type of Web specialists known as reputation managers who work at companies like Reputation.com and Metal Rabbit Media. These companies offer their clients’ services designed to expunge negative blog posts, tweets and photos, bury unfavorable Google search results and monitor clients’ “virtual image.”

Unlike individual users who manually try to remove incriminating information by themselves, reputation management companies actually write code or develop algorithms to expunge or reduce the impact of potentially damaging material. Not surprisingly, these services are not free and they typically cost $120 to $600 per year for the “average person.” Celebrities, politicians and corporate executives are usually charged $5,000 to $10,000 per month (fame is expensive so be careful what you wish for).

Obviously, unfortunate digital fiascos can easily be averted if you stop and think about the content before you post it. This bit of advice is extremely important for those who are actively involved in a job search. To that end, I highly recommend that active jobseekers routinely Google themselves to get a “digital snapshot “of the information about them on the Web. However, if you determine that “genie is already out of the bottle” (and you can’t force it back in by yourself) then it may be time to call in the professionals!

For more information on digital reputation management please read the post “Erasing the Digital Past.”

Until next time..

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (be careful out there)

 

More M&A in the Life Sciences Sector: Valeant Pharmaceuticals Attempts Hostile Takeover of Cephalon

It seems like hostile takeover bids in the life sciences industry may be de rigueur (how can anyone forget the Sanofi-Aventis/Genzyme hostile takeover saga that dragged on for almost a year). Interestingly, there have been 219 acquisitions of U.S. pharmaceutical companies in the past 12 months, with an average disclosed price of $153.7 million and an average premium of 44 percent!

Late yesterday, Valeant Pharmaceuticals announced plans for a hostile takeover bid for Cephalon, a 24 year old Pennsylvania-based biopharmaceutical company with eight products on the US market and more than 100 products worldwide. The takeover bid became “hostile” after Cephalon’s management team rejected earlier proposals.

Cephalon’s main focus is on nervous system disorders, pain and cancers. It is one of the world’s top 10 and most profitable biopharmaceutical companies. The company had revenues of $2.81 billion last year from sales of its narcolepsy treatment Provigil ($1.2 billion) and its leukemia treatment Treanda ($393 million). Also, according to the Cephalon website, there are several oncology products (lung, melanoma and solid tumors) in its development pipeline. In 2010 Cephalon announced seven acquisitions many of which were intended to bolster its oncology expertise.

Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, long a struggling speciality pharma company, merged with Biovail Corporation late last year and re-emerged as a re-invented company with substantial financial resources at its disposal. Prior to the Biovail merger, Valeant had a long history of acquiring smaller companies to bolster its R&D capability and its flagging drug development pipeline. The new company specializes in neurology and dermatology and has a diverse product portfolio that consists of branded pharmaceuticals, branded generics and over-the-counter medicines. In 2009, its revenues were $1.65 billion and 2010 revenues (to be released) are likely to exceed $2.0 billion. 

According to Bloomberg News, Valeant has offered to buy Cephalon for $5.7 billion in cash. Under terms of the offer, Valeant would pay $73 a share in cash; a 24 percent premium on Cephalon’s Tuesday closing stock price or a 29 percent premium to company’s 30 day trading average. Not surprisingly Cephalon executives summarily rejected the offer as “too low.” Several financial analysts concur with Cephalon and contend that the $73 per share cash offer undervalues the company’s true worth. Valeant and Cephalon are main competitors in the oncology and neurology markets.

Unlike the Sanofi/Genzyme bid, where it was clear at the outset to most observers that Sanofi would ultimately prevail, it isn’t clear whether or not Valeant will be successful in its attempt for Cephalon. While Cephalon has had its share of trouble with FDA over the past few years (for a variety of infractions including off-label marketing of Provigil), the company is in much better shape than Genzyme and the current management team has more resources at its disposable to ward off Valeant’s hostile takeover bid.

The downside of a Valeant-Cephalon merger would be job loss for many current Cephalon employees. This is because Valeant’s bid for Cephalon appears to be a “pipeline grab” rather than an R&D play. Typically, these types of acquisitions result in reorganization and downsizing of personnel because of duplication of effort. Only time will tell if Valeant will prevail.

Stay tuned for more late breaking news!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

 

Interview Gaffes Guaranteed To Prevent Job Offers

Sometimes job candidates do the stupidest things during job interviews. Several years ago I begged a hiring manager to give an MD a second shot at a face-to-face job interview after he botched the first one. The hiring manager reluctantly agreed to give my candidate a second chance to redeem his poor performance during the first interview. After the interview, the hiring manager told me that he wasn’t going to extend a job offer to my candidate because he was “on call” the day of the interview and he kept on excusing himself to answer his pager. This happened almost 12 years ago before the cell phone–texting explosion became annoying pervasive. 

Imagine my surprise when I learned that results from a recent CareerBuilder survey of 2400 hiring managers that revealed that 71% of hiring managers cited that answering a cell phone or texting someone during a job interview was the worst transgression that a job candidate can make (I guess things have not changed much in the past 12 years).

While answering a cell phone or texting is an egregious thing to do during a job interview (turn off all electronic devices and put them in your briefcase or purse until the interview is over), it is not the only transgression that hiring manager loathe to see from job candidates. Others cited in the survey include:

  • Dressing inappropriately – 69%
  • Appearing disinterested – 69%
  • Appearing arrogant – 66%
  • Speaking negatively about a current or previous employer – 63%
  • Chewing gum – 59%
  • Not providing specific answers – 35%
  • Not asking good questions – 32%

I highly recommend those of you who may have interviews in the near future to review this list and avoid making any of the mistakes listed there. In the current economy, hiring managers are looking for prospective job candidates who stand out from the others. But, it is important to remember to stand out for the right reasons!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Generic Giant Teva to Lay Off 200 Workers in California

Layoffs at big pharma companies have become commonplace but downsizing at generic manufacturers? Aren’t generic drugs sales exploding through the roof? And, aren’t all major pharmaceutical companies facing patent cliffs responsible for the massive downsizing that has taken place over the past four years? Teva executives apparently didn’t get that memo and announced today that the company will lay off 200 employees at its Irvine, CA manufacturing facility. Of the 200, 195 will lose their jobs by February 6, 2011.

This is the second round of layoffs at the manufacturing facility that Teva acquired after purchasing biosimilar manufacturer Sicor Inc., in 2003 for $3.4 billion. Last July, 70 jobs were eliminated at the plant which previously manufactured Propofol, the powerful sedative implicated in Michael Jackson’s death. Teva has since discontinued production of the drug because of the drug because it was hard to manufacture and that the company got little or no profit from it.

The company had to halted production and recalled some Propofol in 2009 after 41 patients were sickened with flu-like symptoms. The problem resulted from elevated endotoxin levels found in some vials of the sedative. Several lawsuits also were filed over the drug.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

Career Advice--Week of January 17, 2011

“If you don’t like your job you are less likely to be good at it, and will more than likely end up hurting your career because of poor performance.”

—Eilene Zimmerman, NY Times “Career Couch”

 

Despite Assertions to the Contrary Novartis Lays Off 1,400 Sales Reps

Despite public assertions made by Novartis a mere eight days ago that it would not be eliminating thousands of jobs, the company today announced that it was eliminating 1,400 sales reps. Roughly 1,150 jobs will be cut from its primary care division—which is being consolidated into three units from four in the US—and another 250 from psychiatric and neuroscience. No jobs will be eliminated from Novartis’ headquarters in Hanover, NJ. While the job cuts announced today were not in the thousands (almost) it isn’t clear whether or not more are to come.

According to a post on today’s Pharmalot blog:

"Novartis had attempted to dampen speculation that a huge bloodletting was imminent after Roche disclosed plans to axe 4,800 jobs worldwide (back story) and, in fact, Joe Jiminez, the CEO, had written on his internal blog that news reports about big layoffs were inaccurate. Technically, the Novartis reduction is not in the thousands, but the number is still large and, essentially, confirms concerns that have been expressed over the past month at CafePharma, the online forum where reps dish the dirt (look here)."

Don’t you just love the holidays?

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

Why Nastiness in the Workplace Can Destroy a Company

During the course of my long and somewhat varied career, I have had the opportunity to work at a variety of different companies and organizations. Admittedly, while I am generally a “half-empty” kind of guy, the places where I enjoyed working the most were the ones where people treated one another with respect and management made a concerted and obvious effort to create a positive workplace environment. It didn’t matter whether I was a manager or a contract worker; I enjoyed going to work every day and I worked hard for the company. 

Unfortunately, many companies don’t understand the importance of a positive and supportive workplace. And, not surprisingly, the workplace environments and corporate cultures at these companies are toxic and destructive. They are frequently rife with dictatorial managers and nasty co-workers who are intent on sabotaging one another to “get to the top.” No one who works for these companies is happy or productive and most employees are intent on getting out when they can. However, until they leave, they are unhappy, stressed and generally miserable on a daily basis. With this in mind, it is important that these employees learn or develop skills to protect themselves against the toxic effects of a dysfunctional workplace.

To that end, Robert Sutton provides insights and ideas on how to accomplish this in an article entitled “How Bad Apples Infect the Tree” that appeared in this Sunday’s NY Times Business section.

It is definitely worth a read!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

Jobseekers: Red Flags for Hiring Managers

Times are still tough and unemployment remains high. This means that finding a job is a lot harder and will take a lot longer than in previous times. Because of layoffs and reorganizations many jobseekers may have gaps in their resumes or difficult to explain periods of unemployment. Further, it you have a physical disability, health issues, a criminal record or you are older, finding a job becomes even more challenging.                    

With this in mind, an article entitled “Get Hired Despite Red Flags in Your Story” by Susan Adams at Forbes.com provides jobseekers with obvious disabilities, troubled pasts or less than stellar resumes advice on how to present themselves to hiring managers. Much of the advice is obvious but there are other gems in the article that may be useful to some in particularly difficult hiring situations.

Getting Hired Despite Red Flags in Your Story

By Susan Adams

Debra Ann MacDougall advises job seekers with troubled pasts or obvious disabilities on how to present themselves to hiring managers.

When a job-seeker's challenges are highly visible, like some physical disabilities or a serious weight problem, MacDougall recommends a direct approach. Although the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits job discrimination based on disability, it's nevertheless wise to be upfront about a potential employer's possible concerns.

A client of hers who had lost an arm in a motorcycle accident would routinely answer the ubiquitous first job interview question — tell me about yourself — by saying, "You may have noticed that I have only one arm." Then he'd proceed to explain how he coped, using a specialized computer keyboard on which he could type 85 words a minute. "He had a positive, can-do attitude that inspired other workers," MacDougall says. He landed a job as an administrative assistant at a large company in Los Angeles.

Older job-seekers should also consider potential employers' concerns, MacDougall says. Hiring managers might worry about an older person's health, his capacity to learn new systems quickly, his ability to adapt to technology and his energy level. MacDougall had a 59-year-old client who mentioned in interviews that she enjoyed running several times a week and participated in discussion groups on LinkedIn. MacDougall also advised her to get an updated haircut, if she didn't want to dye her hair, and a fashionable suit. She was hired as a sales manager in Denver.

For job-seekers with less obvious physical challenges, MacDougall recommends what she calls the "make them love you first" approach. For instance, if you have a vision problem that would require you to use a special computer screen or a bad back that makes it impossible to sit through long meetings without getting up, she recommends keeping quiet until you get a job offer. Before accepting, let the employer know about your challenge. "Tell the employer about it, but tell them after they already love you," MacDougall says. She explains that hiring managers are always weighing the benefits and risks of new employees. You want to convince your potential employer that you have a surplus of benefits before revealing your risks.

For more serious challenges like criminal convictions, MacDougall says you should be prepared to talk about what you did and how you've changed. She tells the story of a client she calls Chuck who had been jailed on drug charges. Chuck had a moment of clarity and life change when he had to tell his 10-year-old daughter that he would miss her soccer final because he was going to jail. MacDougall recommended that Chuck share that revelation with potential employers and talk openly about how he had remade his life. She also told him to volunteer to take regular drug tests. He is now clean and working, she says.

Job-seekers with criminal records, who are HIV-positive or have alcohol or drug issues do have legal protections, and there are nonprofit organizations that advocate for people who encounter discrimination. The Legal Action Center's website is a good resource, and the federal government has a site loaded with information about the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Sometimes your serious struggles may be far enough in the past that you don't need to address them at all with a potential employer. For instance, if you were hospitalized for a mental illness years ago but you're now healthy and your work performance won't be affected, you don't need to discuss it. "The deciding factor is whether the employer will find out about it," MacDougall says. "If it's not going to affect your ability to do the job, because you've stabilized, don't bring it up." The same applies to drug and alcohol problems, she says.

If you've had a long period of unemployment, MacDougall recommends listing yourself as a consultant on your resume. Include both paid and unpaid experience. Nowadays, she says, employers are increasingly receptive to resumes that include long stints of consulting or freelance work. "They know what the situation is out there," she says.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

Bucking the Trend: Roche to Add 500 Jobs in Tucson, Arizona

In contrast with many of its competitors, which have layed off thousands of pharmaceutical employees over the past two weeks, Roche today announced that it was creating 500 new life sciences jobs at Oro Valley, Innovation Park in Tucson Arizona.

Roche already has a strong presence in Southern Arizona, having acquired Oro Valley-based Ventana Medical Systems in January 2008. The new positions will garner median salaries of $70,000 per year or more and new employees are expected to be added over the next year or so.

Oro Valley and, in particular, Innovation Park, is quickly becoming a regional hub for cutting-edge bioscience research. In addition to Roche, Sanofi-Aventis also has a research center at the 535-acre campus. Further, the University of Arizona recently acquired Sanofi-Aventis’ older, smaller lab space a few miles from the park. Plans for that lab call for drug research, but the lab will also be used as a business incubator.

Mix in the UA’s Bio5 Institute, which helps move research in science and engineering into the marketplace; and Tucson-based Critical Path Institute, which focuses on shortening the process it takes to bring medical innovations to the public, and there is a growing cluster of bioscience research taking place in the Tucson area.

While this may be good news for scientists and other white collar workers, it isn’t clear who will be responsible for maintenance and operation of these facilities given Arizona’s egregious and indefensible anti-immigration laws!

Until net time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

Big Pharma Merger-Mania Continues at a Brisk Pace

I am certain that many of you may have noticed that the size of the life sciences industry is shrinking at an unprecedented rate. Big pharma companies flush with cash, near- empty pipelines and impending patent cliffs have embarked on a buying spree that is likely to continue for next years (or at least until the economy shows clear signs of resuscitation). Pfizer’s impending acquisition of King Pharmaceuticals is just another transaction in a long list of M&A deals that have occurred over the past three years.                             

According to an article in today’s NY Times, roughly $42.2 billion worth of pharma deals have been transacted so far this year. That number is close to the $45.8 billion in M&A transactions announced by the same time last year (excluding Pfizer’s acquisition of Wyeth and Merck’s purchase of Schering Plough). Unfortunately, these mega-merger deals almost always result in massive layoffs in the industry.

While blockbuster mergers may not be good for pharmaceutical employees, the behind the scenes players—investment bankers, brokers, advisers and consultants—make out extremely well. For example, according to an article in Pharmaceutical Technology Europe, over a three month period in 2009 pharmaceutical company merger and acquisition activities generated $500 million in advisory fees for investment bankers. Clearly, mergers and acquisitions are in the best interest of company executives and the investment bankers not pharmaceutical employees.

There is no question that the recession and the down economy are driving much of the M&A activity in the life sciences sector. And, industry consolation is to be expected during challenging economic times. However, while M&A may be in the best interest of pharma company shareholders in the short term, I don’t think it will help to insure American competitiveness and innovation in the life sciences over the long term. 

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

Big Pharma Continues to Shed Large Numbers of Jobs

While a report released today indicated that the pharmaceutical market is expected to grow to about $800 billion by 2011—a 5 to 7 percent increase—pharmaceutical companies shed another 6,069 jobs in September according to the outsourcing firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas. This is compared to only 200 pharmaceutical employees who were given pink slips in August. Despite a lull this summer, it appears that pharma companies are ramping up again to layoff large numbers of employees by year’s end.

Previously, industry analysts were predicting that job losses in the pharmaceutical sector would be less than last year when 58,583 employees were shown the door. However, at the current pace—43,334 jobs lost so far—the total number of pharma jobs lost in 2010 may match or surpass the losses in 2009. This is because pharma budgets for the upcoming fiscal year are prepared in the fall and the real bottom lines are not known until the holiday season is upon us. Consequently, pharma has a nasty habit of announcing layoffs during the holiday season (nice huh?)

To date, Abbott Laboratories, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Endo Pharmaceuticals, Lundbeck, Lonza, and Johnson & Johnson have all announced plans to reorganize and downsize. It is anyone’s guess which companies may follow suit.

Unfortunately, it is tough to be in the life sciences business these days; unless of course you live in China, India, Eastern Europe and Latin America! Alternatively, it may not be a bad idea to relocate!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!

 

How Online Career Networking Can Help You Land a Job

It is well established that many scientist are not particularly adept at social interactions and are notoriously poor at networking. Contrary to popular belief these deficiencies are not genetic and likely result from the erroneous notion that scientists don’t need career network to advance their work or careers.

There is no question that face-to-face networking is an acquired skill and that practice is necessary to master it. However, the advent of Google search and social media platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter permits even the novice jobseeker to establish an online network—in the absence of a real life one—that may be useful in a job search or future career development. To that end, I came across a 2008 post written by Trent Ham that offers insights and tactics on how to incorporate online networking into a successful job search.

Ten Fundamental Steps for Successful Online Career Networking                                       By Trent Hamm

Let’s start with the big question.

Why?

What is the point of doing online networking for your career? How is it any better than simply keeping in touch with people you know via email or at meetings? Isn’t stuff like LinkedIn or Facebook a waste of time, or at least not worth the time you invest in it?

Online networking tools serve two purposes, really.

First, they make it easy for people to find you – or at least find the information about you that you want to be found. Once you set up a proper profile at a social networking site, it’s often the first thing that shows up about you on search engines. Thus, when people go searching for information about you, you can have a lot of control over the information that they find.

Second, they allow you to keep tabs on other people – and allow other people to keep tabs on you. Let’s say, for example, that you’re starting a new project that might interest a lot of people in your field – and you might want input from some of them. Is it easier to collect all their email addresses then send a blanket email to all of them or to just simply update your online networking tool?

Similarly, if you’ve set up such tools properly, you can effortlessly and automatically follow such news and updates about others in your field, which can automatically alert you to any interesting changes without having to hope that that person remembered to send it to you.

Together, these things add up to tons and tons of opportunities to connect with people without having to invest a ton of time continually tracking people down.

Tactic #1: Just Use Google
One problem that many people have with doing this is that there seems to be a giant pile of services available for people to connect to others. Should I use Twitter? Should I use Facebook? Should I use LinkedIn?

Really, though, there’s only one you need to worry about. And that’s Google.

When people want to find other people online, they turn to Google. They type in that name, click on the first few links, and see what they can find out.

That means your focus shouldn’t be so much on which of these services to use. It should be to make sure you’re controlling that top search result on Google.

How can you do that? You need to have a page that’s (a) fully open to the public and (b) linked to by a lot of other people.

Based on what I’ve observed, for professional purposes, the best tool for that is LinkedIn, so if I were just getting started with things, I’d use LinkedIn. Facebook has more users, but it’s a “walled garden,” meaning the general public cannot read your profile. If you’re focusing solely on professional material, that’s actually a pretty big disadvantage.

Tactic #2: Detail Your Profile
When you sign up for such a service, the first step is to add appropriate detail to your profile. The key word here is appropriate.

The purpose for doing this is to attract professional connections, so keep it professional. Describe your career. Enter all of the relevant information and include as much detail as you can, including past places of employment, organizations you’re involved with (that you’d want to share professionally), where you went to school, and so on. Make especially sure to describe your current work (again, in as much detail as you can). Be sure to share it all publicly, too, so that you can easily be found on Google searches.

The more information you provide – particularly interesting information – the more likely it is that people will take an interest in you, follow you, and contact you for further connection, which is exactly what you want.

Tactic #3: Find People You Know (Or Want To Know)
Once you’re in place, start searching the site for people you know and establish connections with them. You may not know anyone – that’s fine – but if you can at least establish a few connections, you’re off on the right foot.

You might want to search whole companies, like your own, just to get a list of people, so you can quickly identify people that you may want to link up with. Don’t be afraid to connect with people above you in rank – or even below you – but focus on connecting to those that might actually have value in that connection. Don’t just connect for the sake of connecting or else you’ll suffer from needless overload.

Tactic #4: Invite Your Friends To Join
So, you signed up at LinkedIn (or whatever site you’ve chosen to use), filled in your profile, and located a few people you know. Now what?

These tools work better if you know lots of people using the tools, so email a bunch of your work contacts. Send them the URL of your LinkedIn page, along with perhaps the URLs of some other people most of them might be interested in, and encourage them to sign up. If people already know that they have at least a few connections in the bag, they’re much more likely to sign up for such a service.

Tactic #5: Keep People Reminded Through Other Means
Once you’re established there, make an effort to remind people through other mediums about your profile page, so they can follow you, too. I’d encourage you to stick a link to your profile in the signature of your emails as well as into the profile of any other online services you might use (like Facebook, for example).

What this does is it gives people many opportunities to visit your page and keep you in their mind – and that’s a pure benefit for you.

Tactic #6: Keep An Eye Out
Once you’ve established a profile and a lot of connections, it’s worth setting your basic page on the site as a bookmark so you can keep up with what’s happening with the people you’re connected to. I tend to look at what’s happening with my connections on various sites every other day or so, just to keep tabs with them.

For the most part, I don’t do anything with the updates – I just try to keep track of them. I usually send congratulations in response to big news and occasional follow-up questions, but I usually try to avoid too much follow-up (see #8 for why).

Tactic #7: Update Regularly
I also make an effort to update my own profile whenever there’s something significant to note. Whenever something happens that’s significant enough for me to wish to contact people professionally, I make sure to update any relevant social networking pages with a global update (so that everyone can see it and anyone who follows me or is connected is alerted to it).

Of course, there’s a fine line here – too much stuff can overburden the people connected to you. To mitigate that, I keep the update count down to the serious stuff – things that I would actually bother to contact others about, such as major project changes, changing jobs, the birth of a child, or another major event.

Tactic #8: Don’t Get Bogged Down
Ideally, you find yourself in a situation with a lot of connections, which means a lot of people are keeping tabs with what you’re doing. The danger in that is that it’s tempting to get involved in a lot of conversations – and that turns the social networking tool into an unproductive time suck.

My suggestion: avoid long conversations on the site. If you see something truly compelling, contact that person directly off the site. If it’s not compelling enough move on and don’t waste your time!

Tactic #9: Add Value
There is one other reason I add updates to such social sites, and that’s when they add direct value to the people following me. If I find a truly great resource or piece of information that many others in my field will find valuable, I add an update letting others know about it.

Why do this? Why share something of value so easily? If you share truly valuable things, people will come to ascribe value to you – and that will stick in their minds. Do it regularly enough with stuff that’s truly valuable and people will share valuable things with you – information, important news, and so on.

Tactic #10: Follow Up
Most of these tactics don’t require much time, and so it can be easy to just put up the profile, check in every once in a while, and not think about it.

If you just do that, however, you may miss out on opportunity. Thus, I’d suggest two methods for regular follow-up on your profile.

First, set the site as a default page in your browser. This way, checking the page becomes part of your normal routine. You can often integrate a number of pages into a single iGoogle start page – that’s the tactic I use.

Second, check your own profile regularly and make sure it’s updated. Don’t let it slag with out-of-date information. Check it once a month or so and make sure that correct, current, and relevant information is easily found by people searching for you.

Follow these ten tactics and you’ll be using online networking to great career advantage.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Networking (try it, you may like it)

 

Good News for Jobseekers (sort of): Pharma Job Losses Slow in August

The Pharmalot Blog reported today that a survey conducted by the outsourcing firm Challenger, Gray & Christmas shows that only 200 pharmaceutical employees lost jobs in August. This compared with the 2,023 jobs lost in July, 830 in June and the 6,943 in May. According to the post, this year’s job loss tally is 37,265 as compared with 53,004 in 2009.  Since 2007, it has been estimated that over 180,000 life sciences employees have lost their jobs.

While the slowing layoffs are encouraging, there are no signs that companies are going to be hiring in 2011 (unless you are willing to relocate to Asia). Further, while layoffs are slowing a big pharma companies, the number of scientists losing their jobs at biotechnology companies because of insufficient capital or merger and acquisition activities remains steady and will likely increase if Sanofi-Aventis purchases Genzyme and other biotechnology companies are purchased. For example, Pfizer announced today that it was purchasing FoldRx for an undisclosed amount. FoldRx’s pipeline contains preclinical and clinical candidates for investigational new drugs that treat diseases caused by protein misfolding. The acquisition is consistent with Pfizer’s intention to move into the orphan drug market.

From an historical perspective, the early 2000s was the golden age for life sciences employees in most Western countries. Unfortunately, the golden age has ended for Western employees and it appears that a new era for pharmaceutical and biotechnology employees is beginning in the Asia, South America and Africa!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

 

Lilly Lays Off More Employees and Vows to Remain Lean

Despite assertions by its CEO that there isn’t enough scientific talent in the US, Eli Lilly announced that it will lay off a couple of thousand employees within the next 90 days. Most of the cuts will take place in Indianapolis at four different sites where the company currently employees about 13,000 workers. According to an article in today’s Indianapolis Star

“The struggling Indianapolis company, which has been cutting thousands of jobs in recent months, told the state on Monday that its downsizing is not temporary, but for the long haul.

The reductions in force at the Indianapolis sites of employment are expected to be permanent," wrote Kay Jackson, Lilly's senior director of human resources, in a letter to the Indiana Department of Workforce Development. She added that the cuts, when added up, are not expected to be more than 33 percent of the head count at any one site, or more than 500 workers at any site."

Like most of its rival big pharma companies, Lilly has cut the number of full-time equivalent workers by about 2,100 worldwide since last September. That's when it announced it would cut a total of 5,500 workers worldwide by 2011 to save $1 billion in annual costs. The reason for the cuts; an expected steep falloff in revenues over the next few years when the patents on Lilly's blockbuster drugs begin to expire and face low-priced generic competition  

John C. Lechleiter, Ph.D, Lilly’s CEO, contends that the lack of innovation and new product development at most American pharmaceutical companies can be explained by a dearth of qualified and adequately trained American scientists. Maybe this is why most pharma R&D job are currently being outsourced to China, India, Brazil and Eastern Europe? Alternatively, it may be cheaper to employ US-trained foreign nationals in these places rather than high priced American scientists who perform similar jobs in the US.  

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (forget Indiana-not there is anything wrong with it)

 

The Truth About Bosses

Let’s face it; there aren’t many employees in the workforce who have good things to say about their bosses. Bosses are generally reviled and in some cases the criticisms and pejoratives are truly warranted. To that end, while viewing my @BioCareers profile, I noticed that @eBossWatch was following me. The name piqued my interest ( I thought somebody was hawking Hugo Boss watches) and I clicked on @eBossWatch’s website to learn more.

Much to my surprise it turned out that eBossWatch has nothing to do with watches but everything to do with rating bosses! Founded in 2007, the website is designed to alert prospective employees about unsavory and difficult bosses before accepting a job offer. Bosses are rated by answering survey questions and each year eBossWatch assembles a list of America Worst Bosses. Also, you can search the site with your bosses name to see what his/her rating is. The site has been featured on Forbes.com, MSNBC, Business Week, the Los Angeles Times and the New York Post.

I think it is a great idea and one of my favorite parts of the website is its tagline: “nobody should have to work for a jerk.” Amen!

Until next time

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting !!!!!!!

 

Tracking Pharma Job Cuts

There are rumors that companies are hiring again and that pharmaceutical jobs may begin to make a comeback over the next six months to a year. This  may be a real possibility based on a new report released yesterday the outplacement firm Challenger, Gray and Christmas, Inc.

According to the report , 51,034 pharmaceutical employees lost their jobs by the end of May 2009. In contrast, by the end of May this year, only 34,157 pharma employees received pink slips. This represents a 33% reduction in the number of people being layed off as compared with the same time period last year. 

These data can be interpreted in a couple of different ways. First, fewer pharmaceutical employees are getting layed off which means that the economy may be getting better and the job market may be improving. Second, pharma companies can no longer continue to layoff employees at 2009 rates without impacting their with day-to-day operations.

Personally, as a half-empty kind of guy, I think the later hypothesis is more likely! Only time will tell whether or not the economy has truly turned a corner and when we can expect pharma companies to begin hiring en masse again.

Hat tip to Ed at Pharmalot.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting???

 

Bucking the Trend: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals to Hire 500 New Employees

While attending the Advanced Learning Institute conference “Social Media and Pharma” earlier this week I happened to sit down next to Laura Lindsay, a member of Tarrytown, NY-based Regeneron Pharmaceuticals’ corporate communications team. Not surprisingly, we struck up a conversation and I learned that unlike most pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies Regeneron is looking to hire 500 new employee over the next year or so. Yes, you heard it correctly: 500 NEW EMPLOYEES. The company currently employs about 1,200 people.

Regeneron’s hiring spree is largely based on a lucrative research relationship with its partner Sanofi-Aventis and pending positive results from three Phase III clinical trials for several drugs that the company is developing to treat colon cancer, gout and macular degeneration. Industry analysts predict that approval of any or all of the three new drugs may allow Regeneron to Its products could eventually take on Roche Holding AG's $6 billion cancer drug, Avastin, and $3 billion Lucentis eye-disease medicine. The gout drug could attract annual sales of $500 million or more, analysts estimate.

Regeneron is currently not profitable and has one of the largest research budgets (in excess of $700 million) in the biotechnology industry. The 20 year old company sells only one product called Arcalyst; which was approved to treat rare genetic conditions such as Familial Cold Auto-inflammatory Syndrome (FCAS) or Muckle-Wells Syndrome (MWS). Arcalyst annually generates about $20 million in sales. Its current market capitalization is about $2.0 billion. Interestingly, I used to occasionally hang out with one of the company’s founders while I was a postdoc at Columbia Medical School.

While I don’t exactly know what types of jobs are available at Regeneron, you can easily find out for yourselves by visiting the company’s job search center. To learn more about Regeneron please click here.

If anybody out there knows of other life sciences companies that are hiring, please send me the information and I will post it!

Hat tip to Laura for the heads up!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (maybe things are really starting to turn around)!!!!!!!!!!!!



 

Job Seekers: Your Credit Score May Be More Important Than You Think

There was a troubling article in this past Saturday’s New York Times that revealed that an increasing number of employers are using job applicants’ credit scores to determine whether or not to hire them. Persons with poor or lower credit scores are assumed to be less reliable and trustworthy employees (despite experience and skill sets) as compared with those with good credit scores. Interestingly, while many would be employers subscribe to this notion, there are no data whatsoever to support the claim! In other words, there is no scientific or statistical evidence showing that people with weak credit are more likely than those with good credit to be bad employees or steal from their employers. Because of the recession, many people’s credit scores have been adversely affected. This has prompted legislators in 13 states to introduce bills to limit the use of credits reports as a factor in the hiring process. To date, three states have passed such laws.

Supporters of these laws contend that the use of credit checks to screen prospective employers unfairly targets a huge pool of individuals whose credit was damaged by layoffs, medical bills or other factors beyond their control. This caused one Connecticut legislator, who recently introduced legislation to curb the use of credit checks by employers to quip “Bernie Madoff had a pretty good credit score. And yet there is this consistent message that if you have a bad credit score, there is something wrong with you.” Finally, and perhaps most egregiously, the practice tends to disproportionately screen out prospective minority employees. 

Not surprisingly, companies that sell credit checks (Experian, TransUnion, etc) have mounted a vigorous lobbying campaign against any legislation limiting the use of credit check by employers in the hiring process. These lobbyists contend that preventing the use of credit checks could seriously jeopardize a company’s assets, reputation or security.

A survey released earlier this year by the Society for Human Resources Management revealed that 13 percent of employers used credit checks on all job applicants whereas 47 percent say they use credit checks for certain applicants. Among those surveyed, 54 percent said they use credit checks on prospective employees to prevent theft and embezzlement. Ninety0one percent they used credit checks for job applicants seeking positions with fiduciary or financial responsibility. Most of the proposed bills to curb the use of credit checks allow them to be used for positions that involve the handling of money or confidential and proprietary information.

Unfortunately, in the current economy, employers are looking for any excuse to not hire certain job applicants. In my opinion, the growing use credit scores to screen job applicants is offensive and demeaning and should not be a determining factor (unless handling money is involved) in the hiring process. It is an overtly discriminatory practice that can seriously impede hardworking people from securing gainful employment to provide for themselves and their families. Kudos to the legislators who possess the moral and ethical convictions to propose legislation that protects the rights of jobseekers who simply want to make a living.

In case you are wondering, my credit score is in the mid 750s. Conventional wisdom suggests that scores below 600 may be dicey. With this in mind, I highly recommend that you check your credit score before you go on your next job interview—it may give you some insight into whether or not to expect a job offer.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

 

Downsizing: Biotech Companies Are Catching Up to Big Pharma

For the past year or so, I have been focusing on the downsizing and layoffs taking place at big pharmaceutical companies. The unprecedented size and scope of these massive layoffs have overshadowed the downsizing and job loss taking place at small to mid-size public and private biopharmaceutical companies. In contrast with most fully-integrated vertical pharmaceutical companies that are flush with cash, most biotech companies—even the likes of Amgen, Genentech, Gilead and others—don’t have the cash reserves to maintain operations in a down economy or when a drug candidate fails in clinical development. This coupled with the lack of venture and private equity capital has been causing biopharmaceutical employees to lose sleep in recent months.

Over the past few days, two CA-based biopharmaceutical companies announced major layoffs. The first, San Jose-based Xenoport, announced that it plans on cutting its 222 person workforce by 50% over the next few months. According to company executives, the layoffs are necessary because the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) failed to grant approval to its lead drug candidate Horizant, a treatment for restless leg syndrome. This will allow the company to annually save about $15.6 million and focus its development efforts on other products that are in Phase II clinical development. 

San Francisco-based Exelixis today announced that it would cut about 40% of its workforce or 270 employees to focus on development of its late stage drug candidates. The biotechnology company, which expects to reduce its 2011 cash expenditures by about $90 million, said it would focus on the development of its anti-cancer drugs XL184, XL147 and XL765. These layoffs are occurring less than a year after the company announced a potential $1.0 billion deal with Sanofi-Aventis in which Sanofi invested $140 million upfront to license two of its oncology drug candidates.

Things are also not going well for the numerous small to midsize biotechnology companies in the Seattle area. According to Xconomy, a company that tracks layoffs in and around Seattle, the region has shed 4,500 biopharmaceutical industry jobs since 2008.

Finally, BNET compiled a top biotech layoff list for 2009. The notables that made the list are shown below.

  1. Sepracor (530). The layoffs represented 20 percent of Sepracor’s workforce, and another 410 contract sales reps also got the axe. The restructuring apparently worked and Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma the company later in 2009.
  2. Allergan (460). This represented a five percent reduction in the company’s workforce.
  3. Genmab (300).  Arzerra (ofatumumab) the company’s leukemia drug won FDA approval a week before layoffs were announced (go figure). But Genmab wanted to cut manufacturing and late-stage clinical work to refocus on antibody discovery.
  4. Oscient Pharmaceuticals (280). Oscient cut about 100 jobs in February, 2009 to entice acquisition partners. When that didn’t work, the firm cut another 180 in June as it dumped the sales force for its two marketed products. Cornerstone Therapeutics later picked up Oscient’s antibiotic Factive during bankruptcy.
  5. Amylin Pharmaceuticals (200). After cutting 340 jobs at the end of 2008 amid declining diabetes drug sales and regulatory delays, Amylin eliminated 200 sales reps in mid-2009.

While these represent the largest layoffs that occurred in 2009, thousands of other biopharmaceutical employees also lost their jobs.  If the life sciences sector is the part of the economy that has been relatively unscathed during the economic downturn, imagine what life must be like for employees in other sectors that have been hard hit!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting ????

 

AstraZeneca Offers New Details About Its Global Layoff Plans

Ed Silverman, who runs the Pharmalot blog,reported today that AstraZeneca provided more details about its plan to layoff 8,000 employees or 12% of its workforce by 2014. 

According to the post, the company will R&D programs in thrombosis; acid reflux; ovarian and bladder cancers; systemic scleroderma; schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety; hepatitis C and vaccines (other than respiratory syncytial virus and influenza).

The company will shutter research facilities throughout the UK and Sweden and shed about 3,500 R&D jobs. About 550 jobs will be eliminated at AstraZeneca’s US headquarters in Wilmington, Delaware; adding to the massive numbers of unemployed pharmaceutical workers in the Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware region. The company is also looking for a buyer for its Arrow Therapeutics business.

AstraZeneca joins a growing number of big pharma companies that are jettisoning internal R& D programs in favor of licensing and merger and acquisition deals to sure up drug discovery pipelines. The lack of innovation in small molecule drug discovery and the loss in 2011 of patent protection for some of the industry’s largest blockbuster drug franchises is forcing big pharma companies to eliminate or outsource most of their R&D functions and capabilities to cut costs.  

I wish I could say that things will get better. But, the shift in the business model that has guided big pharma for close to 100 years is likely to be a permanent one. Now is the time to begin to consider alternative career paths!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (“Go West young man/man!”)

Share/Bookmark

 

Johnson & Johnson Freezes Salaries and Cuts Yearly Bonuses

Times are tough in the financially-struggling pharmaceutical industry and seemingly getting tougher.

First, Bristol-Myer Squibb (BMS) announced last week that it will freeze salaries but not cut yearly performance bonuses for its employees. One week later, Johnson & Johnson (J&J)—a company known not to be upstaged or outdone by a competitor—is planning on cutting the yearly performance-bonuses for 38% of its workforce and will freeze the salaries of certain other employees.

While BMS publicly announced its salary freeze, J&J plans were uncovered in an internal announcement and other company documents obtained by The Wall Street Journal. According to the Journal article, “The health-care giant told employees Jan. 25 that it is making the moves to standardize compensation across its various businesses and regions, thereby making it easier for its workers to move around within the company. In the U.S., the changes will bring bonus targets in line with market levels, one document said.”

Interestingly, J&J hasn't yet reported its CEO, William Weldon’s compensation for last year. In 2009, Mr. Weldon turned down a salary raise. His total compensation in 2008 fell 4.1% from the year before to $29.4 million, according to the most recent regulatory filing.

The salary freeze and bonus cuts help to explain why a good friend and lifelong J&J employee (25 years and counting) wasn’t too keen on the company during a visit earlier this week. During a conversation, in which I unknowingly lauded J&J’s treatment of its employees, my friend quipped “Looks can be deceiving; J&J is like every other big corporation. People really don’t matter—it’s all about P&L”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

Is the Economy Really Improving? Astra Zeneca to Cut 8,000 Jobs

AstraZeneca PLC said today it , or 12 percent of its work force, by 2014 to cut costs as it reported disappointing fourth quarter earnings. The job cuts will be made across all regions and divisions and were necessary because some of the company’s major products including the child asthma medication Pulmicort, which made sales of $1.3 billion in 2009, and breast cancer treatment Arimidex, with $1.92 billion in sales will be losing patent protection in the near future.

CEO David Brennan said the company was extending a cost-cutting program it launched in 2007, which had saved the company $1.6 billion annually at the end of 2009.Extending the program out to 2014 will cost another $2 billion, with expected benefits of $1.9 billion a year by 2014, he said.

Around 12,600 jobs having already been eliminated under the program, although Brennan suggested that the net figure was closer to 4,600 after new roles were created by the company, which employs around 63,000 people worldwide.

The new round of cuts will be global, including sales and marketing, business infrastructure, research and development and the supply chain. The company’s research & development division will lose about 1,800 jobs and according to Brennan there may be some closures of research and development sites or facilities as part of the restructuring. The company is reported to be waiting for regulatory approval of five new products.

Despite claims that the US economy is improving, big pharma continues to downsize its R&D workforce. Call me crazy, but aren’t these the same companies that argue that healthcare reform will stifle innovation and hinder new drug discovery? This begs the question: how do you discover new and novel medicines and treatments if the people who discover and develop drugs no longer work at your company? There is always outsourcing and M&A I suppose.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting

Share/Bookmark

 

Healthcare Informatics Staffing Shortages Predicted For 2010

Healthcare informatics (HCI) is one of the fastest growing professions in the US. This is because the Obama administration has allocated billions of stimulus dollars to create electronic healthcare records (EHR) in an attempt to reduce healthcare costs. 

To qualify for EHR stimulus monies organizations must develop a plan and then take steps to implement it! Not surprisingly, because of the short ramp up phase for EHR, the number of available jobs far outstrips the numbers of qualified and skilled employees to fill them. The acute shortage of qualified HCI employees resulted in a cover story in the December 2009 issue of Health Informatics entitled “Got People?” It is a great read and provides insights into the types of employees that HCI companies are looking to hire.  The EHR Initiative will likely create over 500,000 new jobs in the next few years. For those of you, who may be interested in pursuing a career in HCI, check out this list of the top 100 HCI companies to work for.

Finally, a group of bioinformatics and genomics PhD students and postdoctoral fellows approached me to help them find sponsors for a Health Informatics Career Development symposium that they are trying to develop for the 2010 Intelligent Systems for Molecular Biology (ISMB) conference that will be held in Boston, MA from July 9-13, 2010.  

If you are interested in sponsoring the HCI symposium please contact me.

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 

Temporary Jobs Can Help a Career

I have heard from many jobseekers, who—despite many years of work experience— are having difficulty finding full time employment. During economic down turns many companies cannot or are reluctant to hire full time employees. However, this doesn’t mean that there is work to be done. Consequently, many firms look for part-time, temporary or contract workers to handle the work that must get done to maintain operations.

Melanie Wanzek of CTW Features wrote an excellent article on why taking a temporary job might be a great opportunity for those who can’t find full time employment. Temporary jobs provide an opportunity to learn new skills, apply old skills to solve new problems or to gain experience in your profession.

For those of you who think that this may be right for you. Here are several questions you should ask a prospective employer when considering whether or not to accept a temporary or contract job opportunity.

  1. Who will my supervisor be?
  2. What hours will I be expected to work?
  3. Is there a dress code?
  4. What is the work environment like?
  5. Do temporary workers have their own workspace or is it shared?
  6. How are my benefits different or similar to full time employees?
  7. Is there more scheduling flexibility for temporary workers?
  8. Is there a possibility that this temporary opportunity might turn into full time employment?

Scientist who may be interested in contract work please check out a previous post that I wrote on this topic.

Until next time

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Jobseekers and Employees: Be Careful What You Tweet!

The whole world is atwitter about Twitter (pun intended). One of the reasons why social media tools like Twitter are so effective is that information can reach very large audiences almost instantaneously.

While there are constitutional guarantees of free speech in the US and elsewhere, there are certain things that are safe to tweet and others that are not. This is especially true if you are corporate employee or a jobseeker looking for a new opportunity. While this ought to be intuitively obvious to most, younger and less well-experienced individuals may not know the “unwritten rules” pertaining to office workplaces and job searching.  To that end, there is a wonderful post on the Resume Bear website(@ResumeBear) that lists 20 things that jobseekers and employees should never say on Twitter.  Although some of the examples and recommendations are comical and funny, getting fired or not getting a job because of something you might have said on Twitter isn’t. 

Until next time....

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Salary Tools: Are You Getting Paid What You Deserve?

Do you ever wonder whether or not you are getting paid enough at work or what the person sitting next to you makes? I bet most employees think about this from time to time—especially around bonus time. This isn’t surprising because salaries are one of the best kept secrets at most companies and organizations. Keeping salaries under wraps is good for morale mostly because it minimizes resentment among employees However, because nobody really knows how their salaries match up with their co-workers, determining what constitutes an acceptable salary can become problematic for jobseekers and long time employees. Not to worry—Monster.com has created several salary tools that can help when negotiating a salary for a new job or determining whether or not it is time to ask for that long overdue raise!

Check them out and let me know what you think!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Despite Surging Earnings Sanofi-Aventis is Restructuring and Planning Layoffs

Reuters reports that French drug maker Sanofi-Aventis (S-A) beat analysts second-quarter earning forecasts and that next year’s earnings will likely benefit from increased demand for its new H1NI swine flu vaccine. The company is the largest flu vaccine manufacturer in the world. Yet, despite surging profits, S-A continues to restructure and cut jobs in an effort maintain its stock share price. —and an “impeccable source”— that US managers are in France discussing cuts to American operations. The cuts are expected to be announced during the first week of August. More bad news for the US economy and  tens of thousands of American pharmaceutical employees who have already lost their jobs.

Until next time

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting????????

 

Managing Troublesome Co-Workers During a Recession

Everybody who works for a living has to learn how to deal with annoying co-workers who, either directly or indirectly, may have an effect on your career trajectory.  However, we are living in uncertain financial times, when having a job--no matter the circumstances--is more important than personal happiness on a day-to-day basis.  Nevertheless, office politics are a reality regardless of how good or bad the economy is. To that end, managing difficult co-workers is essential if you want to learn how to adroitly deal with workplace politics sand advance your own career. 

I previously came across a well-crafted post that identifies 6 unique, annoying co-worker personality types and offers advice on how to effectively leverage these troublesome personalities to your benefit.  While we are living in financially challenging times, it  doesn't mean that you are powerless or have no recourse when it comes to annoying and disruptive co-workers who make your daily work day unpleasant or uncomfortable.  I hope your find the following tips useful and use them to make your "time on the job" more pleasant and bearable!

1. The Naysayer. This office dweller delights in shooting down ideas. Even during "blue sky" brainstorming sessions, where all suggestions are to be contemplated with an open mind, the Naysayer immediately pooh-poohs any proposal that challenges the status quo.

The right approach: Because great solutions often rise from diverse opinions, withhold comment -- and judgment -- until the appropriate time. Moreover, be tactful and constructive when delivering criticism or alternative viewpoints.

2. The Spotlight Stealer. There is definitely an "I" in "team" according to this glory seeker, who tries to take full credit for collaborative efforts and impress higher-ups. This overly ambitious corporate climber never heard a good idea he wouldn't pass off as his own.

The right approach: Win over the boss and colleagues by being a team player. When receiving kudos, for instance, publicly thank everyone who helped you. "I couldn't have done it without ..." is a savvy phrase to remember.

3. The Buzzwordsmith. Whether speaking or writing, the Buzzwordsmith sacrifices clarity in favor of showcasing an expansive vocabulary of clichéd business terms. This ineffective communicator loves to "utilize" -- never just "use" -- industry-specific jargon and obscure acronyms that muddle messages. Favorite buzzwords include "synergistic," "actionable," "monetize," and "paradigm shift."

The right approach: Be succinct. Focus on clarity and minimize misunderstandings by favoring direct, concrete statements. If you're unsure whether the person you are communicating with will understand your message, rephrase it, using "plain English."

4. The Inconsiderate Emailer. Addicted to the "reply all" function, this "cc" supporter clogs colleagues' already-overflowing inboxes with unnecessary messages. This person also marks less-than-critical emails as "high priority" and sends enormous attachments that crash unwitting recipients' computers.

The right approach: Break the habit of using email as your default mode of communication, as many conversations are better suited for quick phone calls or in-person discussions. The benefit? The less email you send, the less you're likely to receive.

5. The Interrupter. The Interrupter has little regard for others' peace, quiet or concentration. When this person is not entering your work area to request immediate help, the Interrupter is in meetings loudly tapping on a laptop, fielding calls on a cell phone, or initiating off-topic side conversations.

The right approach: Don't let competing demands and tight deadlines trump basic common courtesy. Simply put, mind your manners to build healthy relationships at work.

6. The Stick in the Mud. This person is all business all of the time. Disapproving of any attempt at levity, the constant killjoy doesn't have fun at work and doesn't think anyone else should either.

The right approach: Have a sense of humor and don't be afraid to laugh at yourself once in awhile. A good laugh can help you build rapport, boost morale, and deflate tension when working under stressful situations.

Do you recognize any of your co-workers who fit the bill? Or, perhaps more worrisome, do you fit into any of these categories. Food for thought……..

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (remember those workplace politics)!!!!!!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Several Ways That Pharma Can Harness the Power of Social Media

The debate, if you can call it that, over whether or not interactive social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter can be used in the life science industry is moving forward at glacial speed. I decided that it was time to propose some ideas rather than continue to admonish the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for a lack of guidance.

There are several reasons which may explain the inertia surrounding the adoption of social media by pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical devices and diagnostics companies. First, and perhaps foremost, FDA has been consistently reluctant to craft any useful guidance on the use of Web 2.0 technologies for research, clinical or promotional purposes. The FDA’s Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising and Communications (DDMAC) is still trying to figure out how to regulate website content. Is it any wonder that FDA is reluctant to tackle the regulatory implications and issues associated with social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter? Second, a majority of social media advocates— who are leading the charge at many life sciences companies—are marketing and advertising executives who tend to look at social media strictly as a promotional tool. Finally, much of what takes place at life sciences companies is proprietary and confidential—information flow between the company and its employees and the public is fastidiously monitored and tightly regulated. Because of this, the life sciences industry’s “process” is intentionally opaque—which is contrary to the goals of social media which is to promote transparency (or the illusion of it).

There is no doubt that the life sciences industry is the most highly regulated industry on the planet. While this represents a formidable challenge for adoption of social media, it is by no means insurmountable—especially if social media is used for purposes other than branding, marketing and advertising. For example, the most straight forward application of social media at life sciences companies would be in the areas of corporate recruitment and employee retention. Many Fortune 500 companies outside of the life sciences industry have been using Facebook, MySpace and LinkedIn for years for recruiting purposes. While not commonly acknowledged, life sciences companies have quietly begun to use Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace to recruit prospective employees. Interestingly, the new kid on the block—Twitter—looks to potentially be a more powerful recruiting tool than any of its predecessors. Unfortunately, employee retention is no longer a priority at many companies. However, before the economic meltdown a number of companies, most notably Best Buy, were experimenting with social media to retain talented employees.

Another potential use of social media is for pharmacovigilance and adverse events reporting. Companies with approved products on the market are required by FDA (and other regulatory agencies that approved their products) to set up post marketing surveillance programs for adverse events reporting. By law, companies that receive adverse events reports from consumers, physicians or other entities must report them to the regulatory agencies that approved the product. Regulatory agencies maintain adverse events databases for all approved drugs and devices to monitor drug safety.  If designed and implemented correctly, interactive social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter (which operates in real-time) would make excellent pharmacovigilance and adverse reporting tools. Quite coincidentally, John Mack, who runs the Pharma Marketing Blog, reported a partnership between UCB and PatientsLikeMe.com to create a pharmacovigilance reporting platform for UCB products.

Recruiting patients for participation in clinical trials (to assess efficacy and safety of prospective new drugs) has become extremely challenging over the past few years.Traditional patient recruitment strategies include print, television and radio ads and in some instances, websites. All of these recruitment methods are costly, labor intensive and limited in their effectiveness because they only reach small number of prospective clinical trial participants. I contend that Facebook with over 200 million users, LinkedIn with members in over 140 different countries and Twitter which is growing rapidly would be ideal for clinical trial recruitment and retention purposes. Others have also proposed this idea.

Finally, while the use of social media to promote approved drugs and devices may be difficult because of regulatory constraints, it can be utilized to keep the public informed about prospective new medicines and promote a company’s image or brand. There is no question that the public perception of the pharmaceutical industry has been severely tarnished over the last few years.  The industry’s continued lack of transparency and failure to adequately disclose potential safety risks about some approved products continues perpetuate a negative image. One way to restore public trust and confidence is to use social media to actively engage the public in conversation on wellness, addressing unmet medical needs and prospective new medicines and treatments that are being developed. Also, social media platforms could be employed to showcase community outreach programs and discuss educational initiatives to improve science education and training.

Social media is no longer a new phenomenon or technology. It is a legitimate form of communication which has become an integral part of the Web 2.0 experience. I suspect that the life sciences industry will have to make a decision about social media in the not so distant future—or possibly miss a potentially game-changing business opportunity. And, as Ken Kesey aptly said in Tom Wolfe’s ‘The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test’—“You’re either on the bus…or off the bus.”

 Until next time...

 Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Cosmetic Surgery: A New Way to Retain Nurses and Other Hospital Employees?

There is a growing worldwide shortage of nurses and other typically female-dominated medical professionals. The acute shortage of nurses in Europe has induced at least one Czechoslovakian clinic to develop a novel—albeit somewhat controversial— approach to retain and recruit hospital personnel. According to an article in today’s New York Times (which was also reported on NPR several weeks ago) “When Petra Kalivodova, a 31-year-old Czechoslovakian nurse, was considering whether to renew her contract at a private health clinic special perks helped clinch the deal: free German lessons, five weeks of vacation, and a range of plastic-surgery options, including complimentary silicone-enhanced breasts.” She opted for cosmetic breast surgery (which normally cost about $3,500) and also had liposuction on her thighs and stomach citing that she her appearance is important to her and her patients.  Perhaps, more importantly, she could never have afforded to have the procedures done on her current salary which is lower than most bus drivers. Of the 50 nurses working at the clinic, 10 opted for plastic surgery, while several more were considering it. And, at least one male employee is seriously considering liposuction.

While offering plastic surgery as an inducement to recruit and retain hospital employees is somewhat controversial, it highlights the need to improve the salaries and benefits of nursing and other medical care professionals. In many places in Europe, nurses and other hospital employees make considerably less than bus, truck drivers and other non-technical workers. The same is true in the US which has also been experiencing ongoing nursing shortages. But, hospitals and clinics here have yet to offer plastic surgery options to recruit or retain medical and support staff personnel. Unlike Europe, where cosmetic surgery is booming, plastic surgery procedures have dropped about 9 per cent this year as compared with years past.

Like it or not, cosmetic surgery is an option in today’s world and, accordingly, people ought to have the right to choose whether or not it is right for them. However, it is important to remember that cosmetic surgery is invasive and potentially serious medical complications including infection, disfiguration and death can occur. The fact that 20 per cent of the Czech nurses chose cosmetic surgery over more vacation time or free German lessons may be indicative of the growing pressure placed on both women and men to look young, vibrant and remain sexy. Further, there are marketing and employment studies which suggest that younger more attractive people get hired more easily and advance their careers more rapidly than average, older-looking ones.

When Petra Kalivodova, the 31-year-old Czechoslovakian nurse who opted for breast augmentation and liposuction was asked about her choice she said “People of my mother’s generation look down on me for getting the surgery—“I see it in their eyes. But I don’t care. I did this because I wanted to and I didn’t ask anyone’s permission, including my boyfriend.” I think her comments reflect a changing and growing attitude among women 35 and under who believe that personal choice, feminine beauty and pursuing professional careers are no longer mutually exclusive.

Until next time.

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

 

Social Networks and Corporate Recruiting: Leveraging Employee Referrals to Find New Talent

The advent of social networking sites like MySpace, Facebook and Linked In have been a boon to recruiters and human resources (HR) professionals. Social networks represent a vast and easily-accessible source of job candidates whose professional credentials and personal information are readily available to determine whether or not they may be potential new hires. While the effectiveness of recruiters and HR professionals to source new talent is debatable, I contend that there is nobody more qualified than employees at a company to identify prospective new employees who may bring value to an organization. A number of forward-thinking companies have realized that the best way to find “right fit job candidates” is to mine the social networking contacts of their existing employees. To that end, Appirio and Jobvite, two San Francisco, CA-based start ups, developed software platforms that allow their clients to link employee social networks and candidate sourcing solutions to employee referral programs. 

A hiring company that uses Appirio’s application, ask its employees who belong to Facebook to add the application to their personal pages. When new jobs are available, Appirio’s matching engine searches the Facebook pages of an employee’s friends and uses job titles, geography and key words to determine which friends might be a good fit for the available positions. Once identified, a friend receives a referral from the employee inviting him/her to apply for the job (if interested). If the “friend” is ultimately hired, Appirio’s application allows the company to identify which employee found the match and offer a referral bonus. To address privacy concerns, the list of possible matches is available to only to friends/employees—not the hiring company or Appirio.

Jobvite offers a similar service but in addition to Facebook, it also searches and mines friend/contact information from Linked In and Twitter. And, anyone who receives a Jobvite referral can also search his/her own network to identify suitable job candidates and pass it along again. Jobvite recipients who are hired can be tracked to the original sender, so that the employee can receive a referral bonus—even if the Jobvite referral has been passed from one inbox to another up to six times.

Despite the explosion of job boards, social networking sites and social media tools like Twitter, employee referrals are still the most effective way for jobseekers to find new jobs. The Appirio and Jobvite solutions represent a novel way to leverage employee relationships to match jobseekers with prospective new employers. However, in this job market, I wouldn’t sit around and wait to receive an Appirio or Jobvite invitation from one of your social networking friends. Instead, I recommend that you put your social networking sites to good use and tell everyone you know that you are actively seeking employment.  Because at the end of the day finding a new job is all about networking!

Until next time...

Good luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

 

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Where Have All the R&D Jobs Gone?

Over the past three years, more than 90,000 pharmaceutical employees have been layed off. While many of these former employees were drug reps, a majority who lost their jobs were R&D scientists. If drug makers have already jettisioned tens of thousands of R&D jobs, how is the next generation of medicines going to be discovered and developed? Like it or not, pharmaceutical and biotechnology R&D is beginning to be outsourced—much like information technology (IT) was in the late 1990s. And, like the IT industry much of R&D is being outsourced to countries like India and China. This should not be surprising because for the past 20 years or so, most of the people receiving PhDs in the life sciences were foreign nationals—many of whom were unable to stay in the US because of post-9/11 immigration policies and visa quotas. Without many options, many had no choice but to return to their home countries to seek employment and in some at contract research organizations (CROs) that specialize in pharmaceutical and biotechnology R&D.

According to a recent article written by J B Gupta Senior Vice President Collaborative Research GVK Biosciences Pvt. Ltd. India, for the last five years or so, Indian CROs like GVK Biosciences, Aurigene, Syngene, Advinus, Jubilant, Suven Life Sciences, Sai Lab, Accunova, iGate etc. have been positioning themselves as purveyors of R&D services to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. These efforts have apparently paid off! Companies like Merck, GlaxoSmithKline, Forrest Laboratories, Eli Lilly & Co, Johnson & Johnson, Merck Serono, Wyeth, Bristol Myers Squibb and others have entered into strategic R&D partnerships with many of India’s leading CROs. 

A recent study by the Kauffman Foundation suggests that India better positioned and ahead of China in R&D outsourcing. Further, the pace at which discovery collaborations are being established in India suggests that the western pharmaceutical industry is looking to Indian CROs not only to cut costs but to innovate as well.

Unfortunately, while this doesn’t bode well for American scientists, the US has nobody to blame but itself. Wrong-headed immigration policies coupled with inadequate training for life scientists who want to pursue industrial careers are largely responsible for the current R&D outsourcing activities. Like IT, I suspect that outsourcing will work for some companies but not others. Nevertheless, I think that outsourcing is here to stay and like it or not American life scientists will have no choice but to adapt to the “new normal.”

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try India or China)

 SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Layoffs: Another View

While I have never been layed off, I understand how awful and painful it must be. After all, unlike people who were fired for cause or otherwise, most people who are layed off are performing well but they simply became too expensive or expendable to remain with a company facing financial exigency.

Most of us feel for employees who have been layed off—anyone who has experienced a layoff will tell you that it can be a life altering or changing event. But, what about the people who are charged with delivering the bad news to the employees who will be layed off? How do you think they feel and what impact does it have on their lives? 

There was a poignant and heartfelt piece in this past Sunday’s New York Times that was written by a company executive who made the decision to layoff workers and then delivered the news to them himself. While his plight doesn’t compare with that of the employees who lost their jobs, it shows how difficult and disruptive layoffs can for companies that are forced to downsize.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!

 

Is Pharma Done With Its Cost Cutting and Downsizing Initiatives?

According to a recent report from the consulting firm Ernst and Young, cost cutting and downsizing are no longer the primary objectives for most pharmaceutical companies. Instead, they are mulling over the new challenges that universal health care may bring and how to better reach consumers in emerging markets. 

In a recent interview, Carolyn Buck Luce, one of the paper’s co-authors said “in our previous report, cost containment was one of the most important initiatives. In this report we found more of a balanced approach where optimizing cost was [just] one the many objectives. Only 40 percent of the executives said optimizing costs was their most important initiative, compared to a similar study in 2007 where 92 percent of those surveyed ranked cost reduction as their main initiative. In the latest survey, 66 percent of executives said the most important strategic initiative was reinvigorating the R&D pipeline, while 40 percent said expanding into new markets and restructuring their marketing and sales programs to become more customer-centric were their main areas of focus. “

One of the most telling quotes in the piece is: “There was an awful lot of focus on costs a year ago, when companies realized there was a lot of fat in their companies and a lot of opportunity to cut costs.” Does that mean that pharma really didn’t have to lay off tens of thousands of employees over the past year? It kind of makes you wonder doesn’t it? And, if you believe that pharma is truly finished with downsizing--would you be interested in a great deal on some land in Florida?

Until next time…

 

Good Luck and Try to Hang On to Your Job!!!!!!!!

 

More Job Cuts and Plant Closures at Pharma Companies

Astra Zeneca announced today that it would cut 1400 jobs and close several manufacturing facilities worldwide. According to a post on the Pharmalot blog “about 600 full-time jobs will be lost in Sweden as packaging operations are expanded in Wuxi, China. The cuts will come on top of the 7,600 positions the drugmaker plans to eliminate by 2010. The plant closings will occur in Spain, Belgium and Sweden by 2013. Manufacturing jobs will also be trimmed in Sweden and the UK as production is shifted to lower-cost countries in emerging markets.”

On Tuesday Wyeth disclosed that it was eliminating 70 positions at its Pearl River, New York, facility (which employs 3,200 workers, 118 employees at its Rouses Point facility in upstate New York that employs 725 people work, and 124 jobs at its Sanford, North Carolina manufacturing facility. Ironically, as more and more US workers are laid off, many big pharma companies like Merck, Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline are expanding operations at their research facilities in India. In fact, Merck is doubling its headcount from 800 to 1,600 employees at its research facility in India that was opened a little over a year ago.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Keep on Looking!!!!

 

Dealing with Corporate Lay Offs and Restructuring on Your Resume

 

Last month, 240,000 American workers lost their jobs. Many of these jobs were lost as a result of corporate lay offs and restructuring—things that are likely to continue as we attempt to navigate a course through these financially troubling times. Unlike being fired, lay offs and job losses that result from restructuring have little to do with individual job performances and everything to do with budget constraints and reductions. That said how should a person who is laid off from a job deal with it on a resume when looking for a new job? I found a well crafted article that provides some ideas and solutions to deal with this often vexing problem.

Read and learn!

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!

 

Genentech: A Company That Got it Right

As you all know by now, Roche, last month, rocked the biotechnology world by tendering an offer to purchase the remaining shares of Genentech that it doesn’t already own.  The first offer made by Roche was summarily rejected by Genentech because its board felt that the offer undervalued the company.  I have no doubt that Roche and Genentech will eventually agree on a purchase price. That said, when companies are purchased, employees of the purchased company are typically laid-off or re-organized out of jobs. In marked contrast, Genentech announced (as expected) that it would offer virtually all of its 10,700 employees retention bonuses to remain with the company if it is purchased by Roche. These bonuses could cost Genentech as much as $371 million.  It was reported that the retention bonuses will be paid whether or not the merger goes through, and are in lieu of 2008 stock option grants.

Even with the bonuses, keeping employees could be a challenge for Genentech. Many Genentech employees (especially those who have been with the company for many years) are expected to become much wealthier if Roche pays a high price for their stock, particularly if unvested stock options vest immediately. That might mean some employees would no longer have to work for a living or might start their own companies to compete with Genentech. Many small biotech startups in the Bay area were started by Genentech alums.

Regardless of the outcome, Genentech’s retention bonus offer is another example of why Genentech was able to seperate itself from the rest of the biotech pack.  It is evident that CEO Arthur Levinson (one of the company's founders) understands something that many CEOs don’t—that employees are a company’s greatest asset.

Roche’s eventual acquisition of Genentech will signal the end of an era for one of the biotechnology industry’s most successful pioneers. It will truly be a sad day in the biotech world when the deal is finally consummated.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try Genentech next Fall—there will be a mass exodus)

Reverse Psychology: Takeda Offering Bonuses to Millennium Employees Who Stay With the Company

Millennium employees find themselves in an enviable position that most pharmaceutical and biotechnology employee would die for!  Shortly after Takeda announced that it would buy Cambridge MA-based Millennium Pharmaceuticals for $8.8 billion, it offered many Millennium employees retention bonuses to stay at the company for 12 to 24 months until the acquisition is completed. These bonuses will be in addition to cash that many of Millennium’s 1,000 employees will get by exercising their stock options (Takeda is paying a premium to purchase all of Millennium outstanding shares of stock).

While offering retention bonuses to employees of a company that is going to be acquired is unusual it is not unheard of.  Retaining key employees during an acquisition typically makes the transition a lot smoother.  Further, it signals to extant employees that management values their services and that their continued presence at the company is vital to its success.  Finally, it serves to reduce the stress and uncertainty felt by many employees when a company is sold.

In my opinion, offering Millennium employees retention bonuses is a very bold and smart move by Takeda.  Unlike other pharmaceutical companies who have acquired biotechnology companies for their approved drugs or investigational medicines in their pipelines, this is Takeda’s first foray into the biotechnology business. Put simply, Takeda executives lack the expertise and requisite skill sets necessary to successfully compete in the biotechnology arena.  Encouraging and retaining employees who helped to make Millennium a success is a brilliantly crafted strategy that will permit Takeda to quickly learn how to compete in the biotechnology space in a fiscally-responsible manner.

One of the biggest hurdles to overcome after an acquisition is merging the corporate cultures that existed at the two companies prior to acquisition. One possible solution to this problem is to restructure the acquired company and terminate many or all of its employees. Another solution is to determine (over time) which employees are or aren’t vital to operation of the company. Although this approach is not as draconian as the first option, it requires an inordinate amount time and money to implement. Ask any Pfizer executive about this the utility of this approach (I think that they are still trying to recover from the Warner Lambert and Pharmacia acquisitions that took place in the mid to late 1990s).  

I think the Japanese got this one right.   Maybe we Americans can learn a thing or two from them?

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!!!!!!!