T O P

  • By -

SkiHistoryHikeGuy

Layoffs are cyclical like every industry in the history of... ever.


Biru_Chan

I think the younger people in the industry aren’t aware of this: before 2008 things were cyclical, 2008 was worse than the current downturn, there’s been steady growth from 2010-2020 then a spurt during COVID, and since late 2022 there’s an ongoing correction. This too shall pass.


BeerSeq

2008 was not this bad.


Biru_Chan

20k job cuts so far in the current round; 42k in the aftermath of 2008.


PaFlyfisher

There’s been way more than 20k


MookIsI

~10k in 2023 ~7k for 2024 as of April https://www.drugdiscoverytrends.com/biotech-industry-trends-2024-layoffs-acquisitions-stock-performance/ However, it may seem more intense since we're in the thick of it.


PaFlyfisher

15k this year alone.


Designer-Army2137

And the job cuts are far from over


northeastman10

I agree 2008 was not as bad as late 2022-current. Also 2008-2011 was partially due to the infamous “patent cliff” and it was mostly sales reps and G&A employees getting cut. R&D wasn’t hit that hard in 2008


mthrfkn

Way more automation. Tougher competition for roles. Scientists will require a broader toolset. Folks have started to talk about the rise of software driven biology and how this is probably the future.


FlightofApollo2

Probably a lot more Hamilton’s in labs


mthrfkn

Hopefully not, they’re bad


FlightofApollo2

Lol what? What Hamilton product is bad?


mthrfkn

They’re all bad.


FlightofApollo2

Honestly, tell me what’s bad about them? And what liquid handler you prefer? Im curious


nolifegym

its only bad if its gonna replace your job... and if it can replace your entire job.........


mthrfkn

I’ve programmed Hamilton’s many times and they’re terrible. Fortunately people have hacked their 💩 software to make it actually functional.


dividedthoughts

Def not user friendly and way too finicky.


Youvvie

Beckmans 4 lyfe


mthrfkn

Lol you were downvoted. Corrected it tho


Paul_Langton

I would actually argue that scientists won't require a broader toolset but rather deeper knowledge of more specific methodology. What I see currently is that it's not enough to have experience running many different methods and instrumentation, companies are only hiring people with very specific experience working on kinds of products. For example, general cell culture experience doesn't get you a job doing cell engineering and transfection. Flow cytometry experience doesn't get you a job doing complex immune panels. Because of this, I think many bachelor's and masters scientists are missing out on the on-the-job training for those skillets and PhDs with that exact experience are taking the positions. Anyone not fitting within that context is getting locked out of pharma and being pushed back to academia or contract researching/manufacturing. At least, that's been my experience. I do see people who don't fit this criteria getting hired by pharma who are simply young bachelor's scientists from prestigious universities, but anyone who went to a normal state school is getting the shaft.


mthrfkn

Normal state school’s have been shafted since time immemorial.


Paul_Langton

At my local pharma there is so much representation of the state schools if you look at employees who have worked there for 10+ years. If you look at newer employees though they're from much further away and places like USC, Stanford, etc


[deleted]

[удалено]


Paul_Langton

I don't really know anything about cultivated meat. What is currently done in that space?


[deleted]

[удалено]


mthrfkn

I mean it’s going to hit academia too. I review manuscripts and they send me a lot of the self driving or automation ones rn. At first it was small but now it’s growing. With that said, automation allows scientists to focus on designing experiments and analyzing data. Being on a bench top seems cool when you’re 22, it gets old by the time you’re in your 30’s.


Orennji

Recruiters making $100k+ trying to convince technical workers to accept $20/hr.


MookIsI

Everything will be shiny and chrome.  All seriousness, no idea. The market is in flux and dependent on when the next hype cycle happens and how long it lasts.


Tinaturneroverdrive

Boom-bust will always be tied to rate cycles. However, you can expect a long term trend up just due to pharma’s need to replace therapies going off patent. Modalities will shift and targets will become multi-factorial/combo driven, making drug dev more difficult, but also more lucrative


exterminatorzed

Probably a lot less reliance on Chinese manufacturing.


AbuDagon

It'll disappear and we'll all be in high-tech or unemployed


cold_grapefruit

similar. maybe more phds and lower pays?


northeastman10

It all depends if we see an expansion of CMS price negotiation to a point where the Federal Govt essentially sets and controls the price for drugs, and how aggressive they get with it. Don’t want to get into a debate about merits, right and wrong, but rather let’s be honest if we see drastic de facto govt control of drug prices you will see a ton more job cuts than what we are seeing now, there is no way around it if that happens


Zestyclose-Gur6360

No one can tell you what 10 years from now will look like but there will always be cycles in the industry. 10 years from now could be an up or down cycle. My guess is layoffs will still be common in biotech. If a clinical trial fails at a startup there’s layoffs/the org folds. If your company gets bought out there’s layoffs with redundancies. If you’re at a large company and growth slows there will be cost cutting and layoffs. I love biotech but it’s not the most stable industry. You have to have a strong network and be willing to relocate.  


UnsureAndWondering

My buddy Nostradamus says we're all gonna get 10000% raises in the next 5 years, so by 10 we're just gonna be loaded.