Majoring in science is not the way to go??

College Majors Science Majors
21

<p>Well perhaps you can post an example of a job ad with no specific degree or experience requirements because after viewing thousands of job ads the only ones I see like that are scams or menial jobs.</p>

<p>Companies will only compromise on their specific requirements if they have to and with the glut of scientists and the market the way it is they do not have to. The job ads I’ve read require not just a chemistry degree but a chemistry degree and 5 years experience with thermosetting resins, or bakery product development, or paint formulations etc. Even the crapo permatemp jobs want specific experience.</p>

22

<p>Keep in mind that job postings are for ideal candidates. Generally, if you meet all of the criteria for a job posting you should be able to get a better job.</p>

23

<p>Exactly and the job postings look like this</p>

<p>Education Master’s Degree
Job Requirements
What You Will be Doing:
Developing novel TIO2 products for coatings, paints, etc.
Develop technical strategy of new product, Plan and design experiments
Interface with manufacturing plants and customers
What You Need to Qualify for this Job:
3-5-7+ years experience in the chemistry of pigments, paints, coatings
Experience with surface modification of particles with polymer chemistry
Product Development experience
Background in dispersant chemistry, surface interface phenomena, flocculation, wetting, adhesion, rheology of coatings and substrates
PhD, MS, Organic, Polymer, or Physical Chemistry or related degrees</p>

<p>You had better be able to meet all the above qualifications or the only other jobs left for you are</p>

<p>Chemist
Company: Aerotek Scientific<br>
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Category: Scientific Jobs
Rate: $12.00 per Hour
Job Type: Contract-to-Hire
Posting ID: 2567542
Posting Date: 5/29/2012 Allegis Group Family of Hiring Companies
Apply Online for this Job Today</p>

<p>ALREADY A MEMBER?</p>

<p>If you’re currently a thingamajob.com member? Please apply here. </p>

<p>NOT A MEMBER?</p>

<p>We’re hiring. Create an account and you can apply for some of the most desirable Scientific job opportunities in the country.</p>

<p>Chemist Job Description:</p>

<p>Seeking candidates with a background in Biology or Chemistry. A Bachelor of Science in Biology or Chemistry is required. Must be familiar with FTIR, SEM, GC, and titrations. 0-2 years of previous experience is preferred. Must be able to work 8am-4pm, Monday-Friday, with occasional overtime.</p>

<p>Required Skills for Chemist Job:</p>

<p>TITRATIONS
GC
FTIR
WET CHEMISTRY
About Aerotek Scientific:</p>

<p>Join Aerotek Scientific®LLC, one of the fastest growing providers of scientific and clinical research services in the nation. Due to our growth, we’re constantly on the lookout for qualified professionals to place in contract, contract-to-hire, and permanent placement positions across the scientific and clinical research communities. At Aerotek Scientific, we know it’s more than just your day-to-day responsibilities that can make or break a job. It’s the support you get. That’s the reason Aerotek Scientific offers a variety of benefits including medical, dental, optical, 401k, and many more. Don’t put your career in the hands of just anyone, put it in the hands of a specialist. Join the Aerotek Scientific team! Allegis Group and its subsidiaries are equal opportunity employers and will consider all applications without regard to race,</p>

24

<p>SS, I don’t get why a bachelors degree is needed for the last job description. These two things are learned in the first two semesters of General Chem Lab. So, why would I spend four years in school, just to get a job some freshman can do? Economically, it makes no sense. And ibor, why would you follow Government statistics? They don’t take everything into consideration. For example, they state Unemployment is 8%, when in reality it is about 20%. They don’t take into account those people who gave up looking or working part time. And ok, although the commodities industry is very lucrative right now, it is also directly linked to the market. If the demand for Gold, Platinum, Natural Gas, Oil, or whatever other commodity goes down, there goes the job. Like the market, it is prone to the Boom/Bust Cycle. But nobody wants to go into those jobs, they are often dirty and in remote locations, far away from family. You’re probably better off as a commodities trader on the NYME.</p>

25

<p>sschoe2, the problem here is that you don’t really understand how people get jobs in science. What you wrote earlier, and what you’re basing your posts off of, is this:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>But that’s the WORST way to try and get a job in science. Nobody does that unless they have no better options.</p>

<p>The best way to get jobs in science is the same as the best way to get jobs anywhere else – through a personal recommendation. That’s how I’ve gotten every chemistry job I’ve held since 1994. Prior experience doing what the job entails was never an issue.</p>

<p>The “requirements” in the job descriptions are almost always not required as long as you have demonstrated competence in some way. What they want is someone who can do the job well, not necessarily someone who has already done that job. Every employer does things differently and you have to learn their way of doing it no matter whether you have experience or not. </p>

<p>If you want a job in science, then 1) network, 2) be good at what you do (whatever it happens to be), and 3) be someone other people want to work with. They’ll teach you whatever you need to know after you’re hired – that’s standard operating procedure at every degree level. That’s not to say all jobs require no experience, but credible experience in a related area is enough to assure them that you can do the work they need done.</p>

<p>When my wife was director of customer support for a database software company, she never had applicants who were already familiar with the company’s software (it’s embedded in other programs, not sold retail), and almost never had applicants who met all the job requirements. I asked her what she looked for in an applicant, and she said, “I used to look for someone who had the basics and could be trained in what they didn’t know.” It’s pretty much the same story everywhere.</p>

26

<p>As someone who has spent a lot of time interviewing and job hunting that is not true.</p>

<p>I have applied for positions that were a close match and gotten told I was not qualified. I applied for a job at a generic pharma as an analytical development chemist using the same instruments as I do now in the food industry and got told they only wanted candidates with pharma experience.</p>

<p>I applied for a position as a bakery food scientist and got told I was unqualified because I had worked with cereals and not baked good.</p>

<p>My personal favorite I got told I was unqualified as an analytical chemist for a position because I used Agilent equipment and not Waters. *</p>

<p>When I interview they typically take one of two formats. In one type they simply have a checklist of instruments and techniques and ask if I have experience with them or not.</p>

<p>The other type I end up sitting with a vacuous HR bimbo or even a manager and they read off cliched interview questions and psychobabble and I feel like I am at a shrink’s office.</p>

<p>The requirements are only flexible when they cannot get candidates who meet them and even then many companies will leave a job open for months until they do. </p>

<p>As for networking I don’t really know anyone in industry. My department like many was academic centered. Most of my colleagues who are not stuck in post doc limbo have left the field and are doing teaching, healthcare professional school or some other unrelated career.</p>

27

<p>There are always a minority of people very good at networking that are able to cut through the line and get jobs regardless of how bad a field is or how weak their qualifications are. That is not the norm for most people.</p>

<p>It also becomes a blow off. The field is not bad you just need to network to get a job. I saw that a lot on the AAS science careers forum. Someone would come in and say I was a neurobiology PhD and have been unemployed for 3 years. Everyone would just blow him off and tell him oh well you need to network harder not that they are in a field with poor prospects and a degree with minimal utility.</p>

28

<p>They wouldn’t even bring you in for an interview if you weren’t a viable candidate for the job. It’s not a matter of the qualifications – you’ve already cleared that hurdle if you’re in the room with them. At that point it’s a matter of how you’re interviewing.</p>

<p>And the point I’m trying to make is that when they don’t know you from Adam, the hiring standard is not the same. When you come with a recommendation from someone they trust, it’s a different procedure. You’re doing it the hardest way possible every time and then claiming that no other way exists. When I cite actual, factual examples of companies who hire with the intent to train the new employee, you say that’s wrong because it doesn’t agree with your experience.</p>

<p>Facts is facts, Jack. If it ain’t working for you, that don’t mean it ain’t true. It means you ain’t doing it right. I’m not some kind of networking guru, I’m just a regular guy who knows the value of doing good work and having a positive attitude on the job. You’re like a geyser of negativity on CC, and if even a hint of that comes through at work or in an interview, that would go a long way toward explaining why your experiences and mine are so drastically different.</p>

29

<p>I am saying that I am well aware that some people are so well connected and charming that they can get a job even with a BA in comparative religions. They are not typical. I am also aware of the private sector’s tendencies towards cronyism and nepotism and that some people are adept at exploiting it. </p>

<p>Most people have to demonstrate extremely relevant experience and academic credentials especially in a field as oversaturated as science. There is a reason more than half of all college grads end up un or underemployed and that science degrees are on the worse end of the spectra for graduates end up with good jobs. It ranks about the same as BA’s. Most people go into science because they think it is more practical and straightforward path to a career than majoring in Greek Poetry. That is not the case. </p>

<p>Those who don’t have a drinking buddy in hiring authority would be wise to get a degree in a field in demand such as accounting, economics, engineering, or go to professional school.</p>

30

<p>When you write off networking as an anomaly available only to a select privileged few, you’ve exited the main highway of modern civilization and consigned yourself to taking dusty back roads to success. Unfortunately, that’s the long way and often doesn’t get there at all.</p>

<p>Anyone can network. My posts here are evidence enough of my limited charm. Woody Allen was correct when he said said “Ninety percent of life is just showing up,” but to a great many people, showing up is too much bother. Join your local ACS chapter and go to some meetings. Present a paper about your own work at a conference. Socialize professionally. Socialize socially. When nobody knows who you are, you have to market yourself out of a black hole. When people know your name, opportunities come to you. That’s a fact of life in any discipline.</p>

<p>At least we can agree that with the right attitude toward networking, even a BA in comparative religion can find a rewarding career. Of course, the same is true for someone with a chemistry degree.</p>

31

<p>Everyone knows networking is effective. However, if you have a degree and skills that are in demand you don’t have to.</p>

<p>If you have a science degree now a days it might as well be the 1930’s for you. Did people get jobs during the great depression. Sure. Lots of people got jobs during the great depression and some even really good jobs. I’m sure networking played a big part of those who did. However, most people did not and desperately struggled to survive. The difference is You can chose to go into a profession now a days that does not have 20%+ flat out unemployment.</p>

32

<p>It’s just so competitive, people are racing to get the 6 figure salary, while they don’t realize business people can make just as much. </p>

<p>Sent from my Desire HD using CC</p>

33

<p>sschoe2, wrong. Networking is huge, yes. Networking is required, yes. Networking “requirements” vary by degree, yes. I’m a computer science major, you tell me how much demand there is. What if I get A’s in all of my classes (even my humanities), but don’t bother with the career opportunities I have? What if I sit in my dorm all day? What if I have no plans for after graduation? What’s that a lack of? Networking.</p>

34

<p>Sitting on your couch not doing anything is not “not networking” that is just doing nothing. </p>

<p>With a computer science degree I’d expect you can apply to job ads and actutally get interviews, connect with recruiters (and not the hacks at the staffing agencies either I mean real recruiters) and should be able to get a decent job in no time especially with certifications.</p>

<p>and for the record I do network. I am connected with nearly two dozen recruiters in my field as well people at other companies. I can tell you it has not helped. I have little desire to switch one crappy permatemp job for another. At least the one I am at now is stable.</p>

<p>Every recruiter tells me the same thing. The ones who aren’t too familiar with science seem shocked at how low paid I am and the ones in science tell me they don’t have many jobs but they will keep me in mind and some absolutely tell me for sure they will get me a job and of course I can be sure I’ll never hear from them again.</p>

<p>So what the answer is keep chatting up random people and hope to bump into someone at a company that either works in food science or protein therapeutics and is hiring and that person has hiring authority. Pretty low odds. </p>

<p>This networking stuff is just a blow off. If you are in an in demand field you should be able to get a job and not just because you know someone or one of your relatives is a manager.</p>

<p>As for the ACS, I have little use for them. For one thing they don’t hold meetings anywhere near me. For another they seem preoccupied with spreading propaganda about the field and how there is a big shortage of American scientists and the h1b program is a positive way of spreading diversity in the work place. I’d never give them $0.01 let alone $250 a year.</p>

35

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t care how perfect of a fit someone can be for a job. If their personality isn’t one that feels like it’ll mesh with the people they’ll be working with, then they’ll never even get a chance. A while back we had a student we had the choice of taking in our lab. He was fully funded by an external fellowship, had experience working in our subfield (heck, he worked in our lab for a summer), and was reasonably smart. Everyone voted against accepting him. Why? He had a terrible personality and nobody wanted to have to work with him for the next 6 years. He’s now a grad student at a different school.</p>

36

<p>It’s one thing if the person seems rude and sociopathic. If you are rejecting a person because he just doesn’t seem like someone you’d like to hang out with after work that is cronyism and not something to be proud of.</p>

<p>In business one should want to hire someone who can do the job well and add value. If I owned a company and found out someone was hiring based on cronyism instead of qualifications I’d fire that person.</p>

37

<p>

</p>

<p>That right there is a 1930’s mindset. Networking is the primary way anything gets done these days. Whether you’re a plumber or a dentist or a restaurant owner, word of mouth is the best way to get new clients. And no matter what field you’re in, networking is the most effective way to get a job. It’s 2012 now, and networking is a necessity whether you like it or not.</p>

<p>You completely missed the point of RacinReaver’s comment, but I suspect that was intentional. You’ve been distorting almost everything that’s been said in this thread recently, then slapping down your twisted version of it. When you’re done, all that remains is the failure you so richly wallow in. There’s some serious denial going on here, and a self-perpetuating misery for which everything and everyone except you is to blame. Take some initiative and climb out of the hole already. Don’t be so helpless.</p>

38

<p>I understand that you believe that there is no such thing as a bad field. You can go ahead and major in Latin and schmooze your way to a job being a stock analyst. The 50% of college grads working min wage jobs are just bad networkers.</p>

<p>If that were true why bother with college at all? why not just get the HS diploma and spend 4 years learning to network and toady up to people.</p>

39

<p>Please, sschoe, stop distorting what other people are saying before you reply. When you do that it looks like either you have no intelligent response to their actual argument, or that you simply can’t think rationally. Your straw man attacks don’t make anyone else look bad, they only reflect poorly on you.</p>

<p>I think all fields have their ups and downs. I have a friend with a master’s degree in medieval history who strangely enough can’t seem to find work in the field. But she’s not blaming her degree for her job situation, and she’s not hanging around online predicting the failure of perfect strangers and pretending she’s doing them a favor. What she IS doing is using her skills to find work here and there – at the public library, at comic conventions, and doing video podcasts with local actors and artists. At one point she had a cable TV producer interested in casting her on a show (which unfortunately didn’t work out. And it wasn’t cable access, it was a national channel we’ve all heard of). The point is, her degree isn’t a ball and chain that is preventing her from succeeding. It didn’t lead to the success she hoped, but it’s not stopping her from searching elsewhere.</p>

40

<p>“Sitting on your couch not doing anything is not “not networking””
Please, please just use a little bit of logic. That statement is completely false. Would you like me use a formal proof? I was going to construct a well-thought-out argument, but now it’s so difficult to take you seriously.</p>