DO NOT GET A PHD. I have one and unemployed for a year; be warned!

I worked my arse off for 10 years with the same company. My site got closed and most people were layed off with the exception of a chosen few that were relocated. Other groups around the company would not even consider me because I only held a BS.

""for all of these supposedly highly educated people, they sure can't spell very well or write grammatically correct sentences."

So what? Spelling is not necessarily a marker of intelligence. Maybe English is a second language, maybe they're using an iPhone or similar to enter. Idiots on this site seem obsessed with English. Is that what you spent your time looking for when reviewing scientific reports? Perhaps you should concentrate on the science and the message."

I intentionally mispell so I can't be identified by me employer and coworkers - mispelling and playing around with grammer is camouflage. Too bad most people don't recognize this. Pfools they are! Transforming a sentence into Star Wars Yoda speak preserves the meaning yet disguises the writer.

Pfired!

I just posted an advert for a Research Associate position and had way too many Ph.Ds apply. There must be a glut of people willing to do any science related work.

Merck (MSD) is a fantastic company. I also hear that they are looking at Medical Devices as well today. SMART MOVE !!!! Building up their Consumer Division is also a very smart thing to do....Stable Revenue coming in.

One thing is for sure, having a PhD and worked in pharma is the death knell for one's ability to earn a livelihood, no on is going to touch you for any kind of a job after that.

Having worked with "sociopaths in white coats" for many years, I'd say all is well, and most of them deserved exactly what they're getting.

"for all of these supposedly highly educated people, they sure can't spell very well or write grammatically correct sentences."

So what? Spelling is not necessarily a marker of intelligence. Maybe English is a second language, maybe they're using an iPhone or similar to enter. Idiots on this site seem obsessed with English. Is that what you spent your time looking for when reviewing scientific reports? Perhaps you should concentrate on the science and the message.

For all of these supposedly highly educated people, they sure can't spell very well or write grammatically correct sentences.

"I hold a Bachelors degree and PhD (skipped Masters citing work experience). From my perspective each level of education produces a wide range of capabilities in it's graduates. Holding these degrees assures an employer that you did the time but provides little in the way of insurance that the individual will have relevant skills or be good within their field of study.

Having interviewed hundreds of candidates for my corporation it's very easy to tell idle graduates apart from those with a passion that actively worked during their education.

The bottom line is that if you are good in your field of study and can apply skills you learned to generate money for the company you will always find work."
I have a Masters' and a lot of great experience within a biotech research group. I have to say that yours is the voice of experience. You're absolutely correct. I've encountered PhDs who were fantastic at what they were doing, and PhDs who clearly have no idea how to make a transition even from Pharma to biotech (I report to one now-- He is quite lost!). Similarly, I've encountered BS's and MS's who have made the most of their research experience and are better at developing commercially viable materials than people who did the full academic route.

Thanks for the perspective.

I hold a Bachelors degree and PhD (skipped Masters citing work experience). From my perspective each level of education produces a wide range of capabilities in it's graduates. Holding these degrees assures an employer that you did the time but provides little in the way of insurance that the individual will have relevant skills or be good within their field of study.

Having interviewed hundreds of candidates for my corporation it's very easy to tell idle graduates apart from those with a passion that actively worked during their education.

The bottom line is that if you are good in your field of study and can apply skills you learned to generate money for the company you will always find work.

Two ideas I'd suggest for job hunters

First - check your referees. Some clowns can write something which they think is really witty, but is seriously damaging to your chances of getting a job.

Second, if you are asked for a photo with an application, pay some money and get a professional one that makes you look good. Do not use the usual 'mug shots'

Carmel

Personally, a Bachelors degree is a tremendous feat w/ only 1/3 of this country even reaching that level. Good for them. A BS or BA can set you at an advantage for entry level positions... and in this economy, you are the norm for being hired. Minimal experience, and a low-pay grade for on-site training. You can take classes, balance the stress and succeed. good for you.

Most fields that offer a masters level certification grants you a status above a Bachelors level. You can think critically and outside the paradigm. You have the capability to pursue your interests and complete them accordingly. An MS, MPH, MBA, etc means you're good at what you do, and have shown some form of excellence that you were able to achieve that. Having a Masters means you're apart of the 14% of the 1/3rd of the country that does complete a bachelors degree.

A PhD, regardless of the field, I feel may be limiting. for one thing, you have less hands on clinical work and a lot more admin / bureaucratic BS you have to deal with. A PhD sets you up for research and/or teaching in some academic environment or in a private sector. Having a PhD means you're of the 2-4% of those individuals that completed a Masters... or of the 1/3rd that has completed a bachelors.

PhD positions are limiting and are limited in general... especially in this economy.

I have my MS and I'm finding out VERY quickly most employers want a BS ... why? They can pay them less. And if something better comes along.. the BS has less options to bounce around. Or so I've been told by a friend in human resources from a hospital setting.

"The UK postdocs in my graduate lab were about ~4-8 years younger than the postdocs from the US..."

but around 10 years more mature in my experience. Regardless, the fact remains that there is no great difference between the two systems except in the eyes of idiots. The few talented people stand out from the crowd regardless of the place of education. Both countries produce a large % of also-rans (currently, both Harvard and Oxford seem particularly productive in the regard), most of whom seem to occupy their time with fatuous discussions such as this.
And by the way, their no such thing as an american education system - it has been formed and constructed, just as the whole american nation was, largely by Europeans and their descendents. So if you must argue about education, can you please obtain one before doing so.

In the US, the average age is 21-22 at the start of a MS or PhD. With PhD and postdoc(s) US scientists can't begin in industry until their very late 20s or early 30s.

The UK postdocs in my graduate lab were about ~4-8 years younger than the postdocs from the US and other countries.

well it doesn't amount to much. Most US PhDs I know were no better than UK PhDs, so maybe that reflects the quality of teaching earlier on at university.

At what age do you start working towards a PhD or Masters as standard, without skipping or retaking?

You are thinking of the business majors (basketball players). Scientists get into school only if they prove themselves with high marks and test scores.

If US schools aren't competitive why do so many UK students postdoc in the US? Its not like UK schools are attracting tons of US students.

US grad schools work students harder. A US research MS is equivalent or better than a UK PhD. US MS requires 3yrs of independent research. A PhD in US is averaging more than 6 years.

But that's only becuase you start at a much lower level of education. No-one in the UK ever got into university on the basis that they were good at basketball - they had to be good academically.

"US grad schools work students harder..."

there is one flaw in your argument. you are an ignorant prick. yet again, i find myself supporting the case for abortion following incest.

US grad schools work students harder. A US research MS is equivalent or better than a UK PhD. US MS requires 3yrs of independent research. A PhD in US is averaging more than 6 years.

The US grad schools also do not give several weeks off for 'holidays' to go visit the EU and 'discover yourself' like the UK. At most US MS and PhD programs allow about week vacation for the year. They work the students much more than 40 hours a week, and expect everyone in work on Saturdays. I don't know why the UK students need so much 'holiday' since they research fewer hours a week for only 3 years.

And then UK PhD come to the US and spend time making PP slides, developing their career, getting jobs for their UK friends, stealing work of others, and treating US MS (and PhD) chemists like dirt. The US grad schools do not take time to teach those skills as they must in the UK as US students produce scientists.

"You mean it takes 3 years for a Masters in the US? What do they teach you - how to read??"

hahahahahahhahaha -ROFLOL!

You mean it takes 3 years for a Masters in the US? What do they teach you - how to read??

3 years? what in the UK?

That's why a UK PhD is equivalent to a US masters

"Masters just means you failed out of grad school"

Grad school????? what the hell is that?

No it doesn't mean that.

Just because you spent 3 years discovering something of marginal worth and then wrote about it in great detail does not mean that was a worthwhile way of spending money. PhD should be much more restricted than they are.

Some of the best scientists I have known through my career have not had PhDs. You don't earn that title Dr so easily with me pal.

If you did not get industrial experience for your degree it is useful to have a masters. Even better if you can get on a masters course which has industrial training. PhD are overated. PhD tend to be quite arrogant about the experience they get. Don't be phased by some of these comments. Unless you have post doc experience then PhD holders will have very narrow knowledge but more general lab techniques under there belt. For entry level, you are better value for money without a PhD.

EQ =/ IQ

I got a masters 20 years ago and it was because I failed the PhD program. I worked in industry for 15 years after that. I then got fired.

Masters just means you failed out of grad school, sure you have a bit of lab experience that makes you worth as much as an undergrad with 2 years in industry, but that's about it. If anything, a lot of masters are not worth hiring, they have a ridiculous haughty attitude, thinking they are at the scientist level which makes them unemployable. With regards to PhD's, they're a dime a dozen, your PhD only has value if you came from a decent school, and then again from a decent lab, and even more so, you actually did something while you were there.

Regardless, the collapse of R+D in pharma and biotech will throw tens of thousands of you out onto the street, never to work again.

hi sir, i agree with you regarding the they are looking for cheap pay for candidate but can you tell them you are assoc even you already told other companies you are.

i have a pending masteral but due to relocation issue i will not continue it for next 10 years so basically i removed my accumulated units in masters on my resume and stick to bachelor, i hope i can get job by then but after weeks and still cant ill stick to idea its just assoc..

this really made me sad, i just arrived couple of months to US and i never thought they just need HS grad. i worked hard for my BS then now i need to hidejust to get a job. this is really serious thing.

I am a double post doc and unemployed

It's really embarrassing how stereotypical this thread is. All the non-PhDs are making fun of the PhD concept and all of the PhDs are defending it.

It comes down to depth. Everyone should be secure with themselves and their role. It's very rare that a BS in biotech comes (from school) and offers the knowledge of a PhD (from school). Of course industrial experience counts, but if you plan on being in R&D (as opposed to the management ladder), a PhD pays dividends in the lab, in your contributions and in perceived worth and often you have depth in a given specialty, which if applied correctly, makes you irreplaceable. Of course it's very hard to land your first job in the economy, but then again, there are plenty of unemployed people (with or without a PhD) in this economy. No one really mentioned the hoards of unemployed undergraduate degree holders that are literally working jobs you normally do when you are a teenager.

The best advice for getting a job fast, if you have a PhD, right now is to move somewhere where there are less PhDs. In other words, if you want a job in Boston or the Bay Area, you better know someone because the surplus of industrially experienced PhDs is high and many are willing to take paycuts just for a job. Apply for jobs in the Midwest or the South and there is less competition, even for less jobs.

Otherwise, use your LinkedIn account, make yourself well-known by consulting jobs and chug forward. Applying by online application or phone calls isn't going to get you anywhere.

im a lamen and think any degree is worth it the thing to remember is what to list in your resume they have no way of truely knowing until u specify.so if phd doesnt work try stating masters and then again not working try b.s. if u still dont get a call tell them all u have is an associates degree.not to mention changing fields to a closely related field might help.im self taught due to family and environmental issues beyond my control and im now trying to achieve higher education. the internet is beyond a doubt the greatest research assistant available.a meth lab is still a lab and can be transformed into a legal working lab if the person has the need.scientists are always in need.and the world always needs scientists even if the work is not there consider your life great. for me knowlege is worth more than money even if u have to pay for it.ive worked construction since i was 14 and engineering would prob be the most valuable to me however i require more from life. (knowing)gives me more satisfaction than a big house i wont have time to live in or a fast car i wont be able to enjoy and poor poeple have more fun!not to mention women cheat on rich men because they dont have time to spend with them,the same can be said for men.after all of this the point being all academics should be obtained for the person not the job this is the reason so many are unhappy with life.of course the right paper published would break all the rules and secure employment in the desired field of study."everything is ALWAYS in the mind ALL of the time" and for those who dont appreciate my words dont read them i wont be back to read your comment :)for those that do,or even understand my point i hope i have been able to help.remember time is linear dont waste it!

What part of the country are you in?
Why do you say never

"Ph.D. in organic chemistry. 51 years old. 21 papers in refereed journals, 26 patents, 3 projects with drugs on the market. Unemployed for 6 months with little hope of ever shaking a sep funnel again in a fortune 500 company."

Impressive qualifications. Over 50? Can you say "Welcome to Walmart"? If you're really lucky, with your chemistry background you can quickly learn how to make frappacinos or vanilla lattes.

How do I find this surplus of PhDs to see about hiring them?

thanx for this

100% agree. I'd go for a person with a Masters and industry experience over the PhD with none. A "commercial sensibility" is key.

To be fair, actual industry experience counts for a lot. I've encountered people with the right schools under the right advisors with what look like strong postdoc careers behind them who simply don't adapt to industry. There is a commercial sensibility which many scientists think is inconsequential and that if they just do the research right, it won't matter if there is any business sense to what they're doing.

I've seen industry waste years on an R&D position for a Ph.D. with postdocs who had no industry experience and no clue how to develop a product to be suitable for other people to make it work. By contrast, I've seen people with BS/MS degrees figure out a good balance of all the different things that go into a successful product launch, including tech transfer, making a product that routinely meets QC.

If I had (as a hiring manager) a choice between someone who spent 6-7 years in postdocs with a Ph.D. (all academic) and a comparably aged MS with a 10 year history of experience doing research and product development and especially if they have a good launch record of products, I probably wouldn't pick the Ph.D. only because there would be a time delay before I could deploy that person as a product research lead. Product experienced Masters? Probably a shorter transition.

I think you are the most frustrating man who tried for PhD and failed and now get jealousy on the others

I am not at all agree with you,I am doubtful whether you are PhD holder or not,if you are genuine PhD in organic chemistry and having good record of publications,then there will be no barrier for job for you any where in the world and where basic degrees are considered for only technical jobs.Taking advice from others is not meaning that you are inferior than them.

As an unemployed PhD organic chemist, I strongly disagree with the evaluation of M.Sc. degree holders as being inferior. I notice numerous job advertisements which specify B.Sc./M.Sc. degrees - not Ph.D.s .
"Hands" are sought by industry; if they are skilled hands, then all the better. "Brains" are in significantly less demand. I regularly seek out technical advice from M.Sc. degree holders.

The "P" in Ph.D. stands for "Ponzi", as in Ponzi scheme. You are exploited for 4 - 7 years, and then put out on the street. The name of the game is the research director's career, not yours.

My advice is that if you nevertheless insist on doing a doctorate in the Natural Sciences, make certain that the department which you chose will also let you accumulate four years of Chinese Language courses, because that is where the jobs will have 100% migrated to by the time that you are "allowed" to graduate.

Employers rarely email you back these days even after interviews. It's the new normal unfortunately.

You didn't contribute to the papers you cite in your CV. Don't lie on your CV. It really pisses people off. They know you are faking half your claimed experience.

where are you located sir?

Don't give up. Never give up. Just sign up to as many agencies as you can find. Get them to market you CV for you. Ask them what level to pitch for salary. Ring them every day and get them to understand you will come good if they get you an interview. Make sure that when you speak to them you are using interview role play and that will convince them you can get the job. They know people inside often anyway. If they see you as someone who will win them the contract, finders fee. Are you going to make them most profit?

Hey thanks for asking and for good words. As a matter of fact I worked in industry for a couple of yrs in Silicon Valley. Unfortunately at the beginning of 2008 I was laid off from a high-tech company. Then I came back to my old postdoc job with a different title (research scientist instead of post-doc). See it was a good opportunity to get by the tough times. I have been on this academic/research position for about 1 1/2 yrs. Now I started to look for jobs (Actually I have been looking for about 3-4 mos already). I want to get back to industry because of course I liked what I did before and it was much better paid. Now the "funny" part is that as I said with all this experience in both academic and industry, I would think that, I should be in a very good position to at least get interviews. But nothing man, nothing not even enough emails... That is the frustrating part.

"What I still do not understand is why nobody is bothering to answer any of my emails when I apply for a job?"

Do you have industry work experience? If not, you are at a serious disadvantage. You are competing against a lot of very good out of work scientists, not to mention armies of hungry, desperate postdocs. It's tough right now. Stay positive.

There are any number of reasons you are not getting a response, and I'll even assume you are fully qualified for positions to which you apply. Here are a few I thought of: HR departments are overwhelmed with applications and even the courtesy acknowledgement or rejection are no longer standard practice; Because HR departments are overwhelmed, some companies are relying 100% on recruiting agencies to fill staffing needs, so any application to a company website is like sending your resume to a black hole; Because of the glut of applicants, only locals are getting a look; Universities/Colleges are notoriously understaffed in regard to administrative functions so their response rate is likely to be even lower. Any others?

And let's not forget the bottom line. The trend is to hire the cheapest candidate. So, not only do you need to meet the experience and qualification, know someone to help you get your foot in the door, but you also have to be cheap.

Yes, unfortunately there is a lot of truth in your saying. The major thing is that connection and "whom do you know inside" is way more important then anything else... like papers, degrees, proven skills etc. What I still do not understand is why nobody is bothering to answer any of my emails when I apply for a job? I checked, double checked triple checked my CV and all my friends and persons whom laid eyes on my resume said that it looks very impressive. Nevertheless I am not getting even a single email/phone call/interview/sign... back... WHY????

"What do you mean by "give it up"? Should I throw away all the hard work and sweat through the PhD and postdocs and everything else? Are you saying that the hirring managers do not bothere to look at resumes if they see a PhD?"

Yes, that is exactly what that means. Experience and connections trump degrees in this economy. The second the hiring manager sees that PhD they know it means that you have to overpay for little output. I suggest a new line of work for you, just repeat after me....Welcome to Walmart!

What do you mean by "give it up"? Should I throw away all the hard work and sweat through the PhD and postdocs and everything else? Are you saying that the hirring managers do not bothere to look at resumes if they see a PhD?