Or if not pleasant, then at least the jobs that people are intrinsically motivated to do.
This is how America treats its teachers. Teachers want to do the job, so skimp on their pay and call it a budgetary victory.
Other countries will choose to value teachers, and pay them well, and generate more competition for positions, and reach a higher general level of qualifications & abilities.
As an employer I always read the cover letters. You had better have a slight clue of what job you are applying for or your application ends up in the garbage.
The reason why is it is easier to train a biologist to become a programmer than it is to train a programmer to become a biologist. Sure the quality of biologist-turned-programmer code will often not be great, but it will usually answer the question asked.
Not in my experience. The reason is because of funding. NIH grants are focused on biological discoveries and not so much around infrastructure. So you can get funding to build a tool, but not so much to maintain it. The downstream effect is that tools and websites are stuck in the era in which they were created, databases are not updated, and tools are broken because the grad student left and now there’s no one to respond to issues.
This is why you should not ever dedicate yourself to a single project no matter how much you believe in it. You should at a minimum have one back up project that will generate publishable results no matter what happens.
Many employers agonise over laying off employees, I would go so far as to say the vast majority do. Many employers try to keep on employees in situations where they really should be laid off, putting their own jobs at risk.
Don’t get into the the mindset that employers are all psychopaths - not only is it not true, but it will damage your career thinking this way.
I've been on the 'lucky' side of many layoffs. It is always good to remember that the responsibility of a corporation is to shareholders, not employees.
Yes, but it is not quite so clean. Employers are humans and in my experience they care far more about the people they know (employees) than abstract people (shareholders).
(This is just my opinion; and I have never been personally laid off -- the quotes in my first message are more about the fact that I actually might have been better off if I was...)
Your manager is likely to care (not always in my observations), but there can be various reasons for that (affected deliverables (compensation); bad experience of delivering the news, etc.). His manager may care. Next level manager is much less likely to care, and so on. And the decisions are usually made on the level where I doubt people care much. People on that level may not like that they have to lay off people and have some sympathy for those affected, but they will lay them off as soon as they think it is necessary for one reason or another. It's their job to keep _the company_ going, not to keep _you_ employed.
Thank you for saying this. It’s frustrating to see all the hate against employers. It really depends on the company and people you work with, and that can be said for both the employee and employer.
This is how employees should treat their relationships with their employers as well. Do what's right for you and your family, and don't act on some misguided sense of loyalty to your employer.
Sometimes the company has no choice as the alternative is everyone loses their job.
I don’t think employees should think of the company as their family, but don’t get into the mindset that all employers treat their employees as disposable cogs.
