I have an offer. I am looking for information for negotiation. is 140K reasonable ?

"Anyone can give me some advice on salary range the position I may match to. "

Yeah. You can expect a salary of $0 because, without prior industry experience, you have a zero percent chance of getting a job in industry these days. Stay where you are and be happy you have a job.

I have done PhD around 9 years ago. Now I am a research faculty (not tenure track). I want to join big pharma such as pfizer novartis J and J. Anyone can give me some advice on salary range the position I may match to.

Thanks in advance, your advice will be very appreciated.

you are an idiot. There is such a glut because there are so few jobs.

So the PhD scientists then repeat the same treatment they get from their directors/VPs - bark out vague orders to their BS/MS associates. Like: "find a biomarker for X". The associates will do some experiments and try to make this work - getting no help or support from anyone at this point.
-------------

You make it look like that only associate is working and running the lab.

Most Senior scientists and principal scientists do bench work almost all day except when they are in meetings. Just feel their pain.

Someone is misinforming that senior scientist come at 10 and sits in his office. Which company is that. There are no cabin or offices for senior scientists, they have workbench and computer desk.

Some people who are posting here may have actually never seen a lab.

That's the smart thinking we could all beenfit from.

i was talking about sr/principal scientist onwards levels. They are in good demand.
Pipelines are drying up. lack is not of people who can carry out a technique. Lack is of people who can understand and design projects. So if you are PhD with some descent postdoc, you will not have a problem to get a job.

Molecular biologists in demand???? Haha the field is just a mesh of do it yourself kits. Does that field even exist ? MBs are all on wellfare brother.

Not true. Many large and small companies now outsource most Molecular Biology to CROs or to Asia. On the coast Molecular/Cellular Biologist are a dime a dozen.

90k is what universities offer to asst prof i.e. PhD plus 5-6 years of postdoc.

So in industry 120K + is the starting point. Glut of unemployed scientists belongs to chemists and pharmacologists. if you have Molecular biolgy / cell biology / stem cell biology back ground, you are in demand.

principal scientist is NO DIFFERENT THAN A senior POSTDOC.

As a senior postdoc (if you are good) you help graduate students for your PI and as a principal scientist you help MS scientists for your Director.

You get more time for your pet project as a postdoc but less salary. As a principal scientist you will get double the salary and negligible time for your pet project.

As a postdoc you get bench and No office. As a principal scientist you get bench and No office.

you spend 5-6 years of postdoc and get couple of good papers you get a chance to be PI. You spend 5-6 years as a principal scientist and get couple of GOOD patents you become director.

This is absolutely how it is in my company. Ultimately I don't blame the principal scientists, its the clowns above them who set the whole vicious circle in motion. Perhaps not at Pfizer/Novartis/JnJ, but definitely at my company.

---

I would say you are not then working in a serious pharma/biotech. I guess you are working at Sigma-Aldrich type of company.

Now a days directors and VPs in Amgen Genentech Pfizer JNJ Novartis Biogen Vertex etc are under 50 and typically in early 40s and they are damn well upto date with the science in their field. They mentor postdocs in parallel to running pipeline projects and publish papers with their postdocs, (that too good papers not just showing 10 plots of toxicity of a compound in few types of cells in some obscure journal). Senior and principal scientists in these companies work intensely on bench (there are always exceptions), and in parallel co ordinate BS/MS scientists.
Science in all these companies is as cutting edge (if you compare translational research) as it can be any where including MIT Harvard etc.

There is some complete and total misinformation on this board right now. For the large biotech company I work for (not Pfizer/Novartis/JnJ), it is the exact opposite of what is being described. Most directors and VPs are 60+ years old and, for the most part, are totally out of touch with modern lab technologies. Some of these people literally mouth pipetted using serological pipettes during their PhD/Post Docs. This is the scientific "brain trust" of the company. They have no idea how to do anything in the lab and are just there collecting huge salaries at this point. Most are unmotivated and gleefully hold down younger talent who could outperform them. They shamefully add their names to publications that they contributed almost nothing to. These people need to be turned over badly, but never are, from my experience.

So what they do is bark out orders to PhD scientists for the work that they have zero idea how to get done. The PhD scientists that I work with are also, for the most part, totally out of touch with the modern lab technologies. Doesn't matter the platform, they have zero idea how it works, how to troubleshoot failed experiments, how the instruments work, how much time is required to set up an instrument/assay, etc. They end up attending meetings all day, usually presenting others data, sometimes the same data recycled from years ago with a new slide background. Under no circumstances do they manage their staff or contribute to the projects they give to their staff. It just doesn't happen, there isn't enough time in the day.

So the PhD scientists then repeat the same treatment they get from their directors/VPs - bark out vague orders to their BS/MS associates. Like: "find a biomarker for X". The associates will do some experiments and try to make this work - getting no help or support from anyone at this point. Most of this work requires novel assays, you'd think the scientist would step in and at least help from an intellectual level, but this is an absolute rarity because they have 7+ hours of meetings and have no time for their staff. If their associates come up with something novel and it works, immediate credit is given to the PhD scientist and they will typically get promoted. The associate, on the other hand, gets nothing - no credit, no promotion, no visibility at all. If the experiments don't work, there is no accountability for the scientist ignoring the project, and the associate usually gets a poor performance review and/or gets let go.

This is absolutely how it is in my company. Ultimately I don't blame the principal scientists, its the clowns above them who set the whole vicious circle in motion. Perhaps not at Pfizer/Novartis/JnJ, but definitely at my company.

90k is what universities offer to asst prof i.e. PhD plus 5-6 years of postdoc.

So in industry 120K + is the starting point. Glut of unemployed scientists belongs to chemists and pharmacologists. if you have Molecular biolgy / cell biology / stem cell biology back ground, you are in demand.

You won't get 130K coming out of 6 years of postdoc unless their is something really special about you. This is unlikely given there is a glut of unemployed PhDs. 80-90K is the range for a first industry job.

it is like judging an architect by how much time they spend in drilling and painting walls.

principal scientist is good or bad but his job is to design experiments that bs/ms scientists at r1/2/3 can execute.

biggest stress for principal scientist is when junior scientists bring (if he or she brings) the data saying - "ummm it did not work" or worst case "i had technical problems" and then they leave for their sweet homes...

Principal scientist then not only has to tell Director that the experiment did not add to the progress of pipeline project but worst that he could not make r1/2/3 guys to execute a clean experiment...

Principal Scientists doing 4 hours of lab work is too good. Think about all the meetings they have to participate and reports they have to generate (also try to make many BS MS scientists work who do not always come up with clean data despite they get detailed protocols). Proposals/delegates..Stress of making sure that they appear to be smart enough by reading and speaking about ideas in all those frequent meetings.....

R1/2/3 scientists will never accept how straight forward their life is. they come and follow protocol and instructions and leave at 5. Whatever data comes is not their headache. No Pressure of developing novel assays for complex diseases. NO pressure of keeping your existence alive in those meetings with Director and VP who continuously keep hammering them with pressure to design breakthrough experiments.

R1/2/3 scientists are not humiliated for not having Good Ideas and not to be able to develop 'Projects' for pipeline. PhD scientist will be trashed for a bad idea.

There are lazy people at every level. But here on this blog people make it look like that all PhD Sr/Principal Scientists are $#%#. And its these other techs who make a company grow its pipeline.

The "playboy guy" isn't typical but in my 30+ year career, I've seen many like him. They come in late and spend most of the day socializing and on the net. Finally at around 3-4PM, they start an experiment and stay til 6-8PM. Nobody notices when you come in but everyone notices when you leave so they look like workaholics stretching 4-6 hours of actual work to 14. I've noticed that most of them have wives and small kids and, besides trying to impress the boss, they avoid having to deal with them as much as possible so they piddle around the lab until the screaming kids are fast asleep.

Salaries posted here are NOT True. No One will give 165K for a principal scientist Unless you are already faculty and well known in your field.
It starts around 80K USD (around 50 GBP) that too in Boston / NY area.

cost of living in UK/Europe is way lower

uk salaries wayyyy lower

that playboy guy will lose his job in few months . I can guarantee it.

A typical day? The sr scientist I work with comes in at 10AM. First he schmoozes for half an hour with the GILF secretary (excuse me - admin)who has a huge crush on him. Then he prepares his breakfast and slowly nibbles it over the next hour while checking ball game scores on the internet. Then he shuffles paper for a couple of hours until lunch. Finally, he might make it into the lab for an hour or 2 of bench work. Then it's back to the office for more paper shuffling and internet browsing until 6PM and then out the door. Several times during the day, the lovestruck gray haired admin will come back on some pretext and talk with him in a baby-girl voice and make goo-goo eyes at him. He's not really interested but he likes the female attention so he encourages it.

For that you need a PhD!

---------------------

What is his rank ?
I dont believe that he is a representative sample.

I know one Principal Scientist -

He comes at 9 and he goes for a meeting at 9:30 and back in lab at 10. One to one meetings with his direct report whenever there is a time matching and then he is in the lab for rest of the day. leaves at 7. On Saturdays he is in the lab for half day..

More or less most of the Pr Sci have this schedule in Biotech wing.

A typical day? The sr scientist I work with comes in at 10AM. First he schmoozes for half an hour with the GILF secretary (excuse me - admin)who has a huge crush on him. Then he prepares his breakfast and slowly nibbles it over the next hour while checking ball game scores on the internet. Then he shuffles paper for a couple of hours until lunch. Finally, he might make it into the lab for an hour or 2 of bench work. Then it's back to the office for more paper shuffling and internet browsing until 6PM and then out the door. Several times during the day, the lovestruck gray haired admin will come back on some pretext and talk with him in a baby-girl voice and make goo-goo eyes at him. He's not really interested but he likes the female attention so he encourages it.

For that you need a PhD!

120K for principal scientist is not BS, its a fact

not sure what is funnier, the perception of honesty from the op or the flacid replies. Regardless, yet again Biofind excels on the BS scale. Still, must be some twat that believes all this crap; why else would Monster Jobs and various teeth whitening organizations continue to advertize.
ok, gotta go, time for a catcha

depends on location. 120K for principal scientists who are typically 40 yrs plus and have a family with kids, in Boston or New york does not go a long way... if you are in midwest in USA your salary is lower.

Do you have pfizer in heart of London, if yes whats salary there ?

I was hired into Pfizer in the UK 4 years ago, and starting salary was much lower than described here. Also, just prior to the end, I was responsible for hiring R4/R5 into the department, and can say that salaries hadn't moved on that far in the 4 years I was there. UK R4 would have expected 35-42k, R5 40-45k. In the end, no-one is going to pay more than they want to (or have budget for) for a new employee

as someone said earlier Salaries are equivalent in US and UK...

I guess for Pfizer principal scientist you enter at ~120K USD or ~77K GBP...

With these salaries is it any wonder that US pharma. can't remain competitive? You should try working in the UK where you'll be lucky to get half this.
------

No, 165K for starting principal scientist in Pfizer ? NO WAY. you get 100-120K.

I dont know exactly how your team and company works but in general in europe (been there for 4 years in research) pace of work is half of that in US and work environment very laid back.

With these salaries is it any wonder that US pharma. can't remain competitive? You should try working in the UK where you'll be lucky to get half this.

A big corporate company will have very clear bands, they aren't going to try to screw you at the first hurdle on pay. Some won't even ask you what your salary expectations are! It is the least important part of the interview IMO. Get the offer first and negotiate from there. If you really feel the pay is not good enough then you don't accept the job and try elsewhere.

165K ?

LOL

Man you really want to screw me up....

130K is too little. You really should ask for $150-$165 at least. The midpoint for the position you are applying is $160k. With your post doc experience 165k is not unreasonable at all.

I've been a hiring manager for over 10 years, and I can't remember ever hiring at Principal Scientist without the candidate having industry experience of some kind. However with 6 years post-doc, I might make an exception depending on the relevance of the post-doctoral project(s) in a drug discovery context.
-------

Thanks, so can you suggest me what will be the right salary to ask. I am thinking 130K...

Biogen salaries seem higher for every position of scientist...No idea about their work culture though.

WOW - looked at Glassdoor Biogen Senior Scientist salary

total 168K....

UNBELIEVABLE.

I Think it is possible. FOR EXAMPLE here is one ad from Pfizer
"
Sr. Scientist/Principal Scientist Molecular Discovery (2 Openings) (R4/R5)

Applicants will have the following minimum requirements, PhD and Postdoctoral experience in Structural Biology, Biochemistry or a closely related field. 3-5 years of drug discovery experience in Biotechnology or Pharmaceutical sectors would be an advantage.

"

So if you have six years, they will automatically put you as a principal scientist..

Out of six years 4 years are in high throughput screening. Position says PhD with at least 3 years of postdoc experience..

I've been a hiring manager for over 10 years, and I can't remember ever hiring at Principal Scientist without the candidate having industry experience of some kind. However with 6 years post-doc, I might make an exception depending on the relevance of the post-doctoral project(s) in a drug discovery context.

If they are sensible they should place you at the correct grade, though there is no harm bringing it up in general. What does the job spec say for experience and qualifications? Every company is different. Pay, there is always some wiggle room, though again they will have very clear bands and will easily benchmark you against your peers unless your role is very unique.
It's in no-ones interest for you to be at the wrong grade or pay (in either direction).

THANKS

so you think asking 130K for PhD with 6 years postdoc will not look OUTRAGEOUS to them ?

You can certainly ask, negotiation is common when they make you an offer.

I am due for an interview at Elli Lilly for senior scientist. I am PhD with six years of postdoc. May I ask you for some guidance.

!) Though position is for a senior scientist, Can I ask for Principal Scientist Position if my interview goes well ?

2) Can i expect a salary around 130K and negotiate in this range ?

Thanks in advance.

do you guys get relocation package and signing bonus for senior/principal scientist job ?

It seems -

you start as senior scientist at 40, by 45 max you can be is principal scientist and still not very important for company not young enough to get an MBA or any other thing....

if you are in science at the age of 40 in academia , better option seems to be to become a teacher in community college and retire there..

40 yrs is too old to start as a senior scientist in big pharma....

There's no shame in being laid off anymore. There is also no such thing as a sure 1 2 3 4 plan. Some people pick up an MBA and go into full time management. Some people get certifications that let them take up regulatory roles that aren't as project based and aren't easily outsourced. Others go into sales. Depends on the opportunities available and your interests.

Also, plan ahead. As a scientist in industry once you hit 45 or so you can expect to be "managed out" or simply laid off at the next and inevitable round of reorganization. There's a lot of denial about this but as an R&D scientist you are considered labor, just like the guy that stacks crates in the warehouse. Granted you are more skilled but at the end of the day if you set foot in the lab you're just a fungible expense. You're going to need a transition plan for this point in your career.

____

Thanks for a good blunt post. I can imagine this to be true. What would be your suggestion for a 40 year old person starting as a principal scientist in Industry...
Do you have specific suggestion for year 1/2/3/4 and 5 so that you save yourself from the humiliation of getting laid off ?

regarding hep c post, the reason why it wasnt published was because it was about screening and not science. any idiot can screen.

Also, plan ahead. As a scientist in industry once you hit 45 or so you can expect to be "managed out" or simply laid off at the next and inevitable round of reorganization. There's a lot of denial about this but as an R&D scientist you are considered labor, just like the guy that stacks crates in the warehouse. Granted you are more skilled but at the end of the day if you set foot in the lab you're just a fungible expense. You're going to need a transition plan for this point in your career.