Bio Job Blog : Bio Jobs : Biotechnology Jobs : Biopharmaceutical Jobs : Bioscience, Biotech Jobs : Bio Job Blog : Biocareer : Bio-Business Training, Biotechnology Training : Jobs in Biology : Internships in Biology : Internships in Biotechnology

I mistakenly received the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) rather than the NY Times today and while I think that the WSJ is a great example of unabashedly biased journalism, there was an article in the publication about today’s job market that contained some interesting statistics.

The article entitled “Gloom Widespread As College Grads Face New Math” offered the following:

• Unemployment among college graduates is 4.2% vs. 9.7% for high school grads
• Eighty percent of recently-polled white male college grads believe the economy is heading in the wrong direction
• Wages for employees with four-year college degrees fell 8.6% between 2000 and 2010
• The unemployment rate for recent college graduates is 10.7% as compared with an overall unemployment rate of approximately 9.1%
• More than 14% of Americans between the ages of 25 and 34 (ca. 5.9 million) are living with their parent and nearly 25% of them have college degrees

These are pretty sobering facts about the job market in the one of the wealthiest nations in the world. Is it any wonder why the Occupy Wall Street movement is gaining traction among American college age youths?   As recommended by the article’s author it may be time for Americans to follow the advice of the actor Peter Finch (Howard Beale) in the satirical 1976 movie Network

"I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs... And go to the window. Open it, and stick your head out and yell, ‘I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!"

If you truly feel like doing this maybe you ought to find your way down to the Occupy Wall Street protest!!

Until next time...

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There is a growing controversy over the rules governing whether internships offered by employers should be paid or unpaid. Many wage and hour regulators maintain that interns must be paid when their work is of “immediate advantage” to the employer. In this case, the interns should be considered employees and must be paid at least minimum wage. However, as the number of internships continues to rise, an increasing number of interns have complained of being placed in unpaid positions doing largely unskilled or menial work. Most labor experts agree that this provides an immediate financial advantage to an employer because the intern is doing unpaid work that is typically performed by a paid employee. 

Because of the growing popularity of internships, the federal government has established six criteria to determine whether or not internships can be unpaid. These include that the internship must resemble instruction or training given in a vocational skill or academic institution and that the intern does not displace or replace a paid employee and that the employer does not gain an immediate advantage from the intern’s work and activities. In other words, if an intern’s experience is mainly educational or beneficial to the intern the internship does not have to be a paid one. To confound the issue, the California labor department recently issued new guidelines on whether or not internships should be paid, with the new rules giving employers more latitude not to pay them

According to a recent article in the New York Times, the new rules stipulate that interns need not always be paid when they do some of the same work as company employees. The new guidelines suggest that interns could do occasional work done by regular employees as long as it “does not unreasonably replace or impede the education objective for the intern and effectively displace regular workers.” I suspect that other states will follow suit and redefine their criteria for unpaid internships.

Don’t be surprised if you see a spike in the number of unpaid internships offered for the summer of 2010 and beyond.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

As you all know by now, American pharmaceutical companies have been intermittently laying off thousands of employees for the past two years or so. Many of the employees who have lost their jobs are R& D scientists, marketing personnel and sales representatives. This seemingly makes sense—because fewer drugs are being discovered and brought to market, fewer people are required to market and sell them. That said, isn’t discovering new drugs the currency and lifeblood of the pharmaceutical industry? How do these companies plan to stay in business if they continue to layoff employees who are seemingly responsible for developing new sources of revenue for them? Taking their cues from the IT and software industries, many US drug makers are beginning to either transfer R&D operations to foreign, company-owned research facilities or outsourcing some or all R&D activities to foreign contract research organizations (CROs).

For those of you who may not know, US pharmaceutical companies have been routinely outsourcing various aspects of R&D and drug manufacturing for many years. For example, a majority of the active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and excipients found in many drug sold in the US are routinely manufactured in places like China, India and elsewhere. Until recently, many pharmaceutical companies were reluctant to outsource many critical R&D activities, e.g., screening, medicinal chemistry, pre-clinical testing, etc. for fear of inferior quality. However, the increasing costs of conducting US-based R&D coupled with a worldwide glut of American-trained, foreign scientists (who were unable or not permitted to find jobs in the US) has made the practice of outsourcing R&D operations less risky and more economically feasible. After all, many of the scientists who work in company-owned foreign research facilities or foreign-owned CROs were trained by American scientists who work at some of America’s pre-eminent academic and government research institutions.

From a business perspective, it makes complete sense that pharmaceutical companies might opt to transfer or outsource R&D operations to foreign countries—the quality is good and it is much cheaper! That said, don’t expect the price of pharmaceutical drugs to plummet anytime soon as more drug makers outsource or expand their R&D operations in foreign countries. Put simply, pharmaceutical companies are outsourcing R&D to cut costs, drive up stock share prices and insure financial growth by preserving the staggering product profit margins that they currently enjoy. Take Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS) for example. Late last Wednesday, its CFO told a group of financial analysts and investors that the company plans on trimming $2.5 billion by 2012 from its operating budget through US job cuts and revamping operations. Shortly after the announcement, I read with amazement that BMS is expanding its R&D operations in Bangalore, India and that they are looking to hire no fewer than five new Department heads—America’s loss is India’s gain!

While outsourcing or expanding R&D operations in foreign countries at the expense of American workers may help the bottom line of many US drug makers, it will do precious little to reverse the decade-long, decline of America’s global competitiveness in science and technology.

Until next time…

Good Luck and Good Job Hunting (try India)!!!!!!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (4)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link