Way more STEM degrees than STEM jobs

[Frances]

I don't know what annoys me more, continuing to hear about the mythical STEM shortage in this country or companies, especially very profitable ones, that won't take people with strong analytical abilities who successfully conquered very difficult majors and invest some time and money training them. Stop whining about a shortage of qualified workers and do something about it yourself instead of expecting fully trained people with years of precise experience to magically appear in front of you.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/education/edlife/stem-jobs-industry-careers.html

 

I'm very fortunate that the small, local software company I got on with after taking several years off when my son was young was willing to take a chance on me. I literally had zero experience, education, or training related to anything they did. But they basically said, you have a STEM degree from a top school, so we trust you will be successful here. Six months later when the company was sold, I was completely up to speed and was one of only four employees retained by the new company.

[Gwen in VA]

Basically it benefits the technology companies to have this myth continue.

 

If people believe there is a shortage of STEM employees, people will continue to emphasize going into STEM fields and there will be a resultant surplus of STEM-credentialed workers available. This surplus of potential employees means that the companies can be pickier about who they hire, which benefits them.

 

 

[regentrude]

Yet for the last 18 years, our department has not been able to hire a qualified American candidate for a tenure track physics faculty position. Every single tenure track hire, and almost all of the candidates on the short list, were foreigners.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[Frances]

I wonder if that's because so many US students have heard about the difficulties of getting a tenure track job in any field. We know lots of PhDs because we live in a college town and because my husband used to be in academia, and yet we don't know a single one who has a child pursuing a PhD. Our son certainly never considered it after growing up surrounded by PhDs.

 

At least for an international student in a STEM field, they have the possibility of working in the US for awhile after getting their PhD here and maybe eventually being able to stay if they wish. I know things have changed to some degree, but when I was in grad school, every single foreign student in my program wanted to stay permanently in the US and was working toward that goal. So many have an extra incentive for pursuing a graduate STEM degree in the US.

[JanetC]

Yet for the last 18 years, our department has not been able to hire a qualified American candidate for a tenure track physics faculty position. Every single tenure track hire, and almost all of the candidates on the short list, were foreigners.

Do you think there is a problem with your recruitment process, pay, working conditions, etc. versus other possible employers, or do you think it's just because there are no American candidates out there?

[wapiti]

This sort of article has come up before.  Who knows how the "job openings" in a field are determined - the article's point about the need for expertise that combines some of these fields with a digital/computer/data angle is obvious but it's unclear whether these sorts of jobs are included in the "openings" data.  IMO, it might be (slightly) more interesting to look at unemployment rates for certain majors instead, assuming such rates don't include grad students.

 

This also comes on the heels of a news article bemoaning the scarcity of artificial intelligence expertise and advertising super-high salaries that such expertise may command.

 

ETA, and I'm not sure how the Life Sciences category can avoid health care occupations when bio is an extremely common major for those headed to medicine.

Edited November 3, 2017 by wapiti

[regentrude]

Do you think there is a problem with your recruitment process, pay, working conditions, etc. versus other possible employers, or do you think it's just because there are no American candidates out there?

 

The recruitment process is standardized for this type of position. The working conditions are comparable to those of any  faculty at any institution.

The American candidates who apply are below the level of the foreign applicants. So we are not talking about people not being satisfied with the negotiations after the job offer who decline; they do not make the short list.

The good American candidates apparently can find more attractive positions elsewhere and do not have to stoop to teaching at a public university - which must mean there are jobs in industry that pay well.

ETA: there seems to be some variation across disciplines within physics. Nobody knows why that is.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

I don't know what annoys me more, continuing to hear about the mythical STEM shortage in this country or companies,

 

 

 

I think the big mythology is creating this one bucket called "STEM" and assuming lots of commonality across it.  The job market for computer science graduates is completely different than for, say marine biologists, even though they are both "STEM".

[regentrude]

I think the big mythology is creating this one bucket called "STEM" and assuming lots of commonality across it.  The job market for computer science graduates is completely different than for, say marine biologists, even though they are both "STEM".

 

This. It is stupid to lump all those categories into one "STEM" bucket. The differences between fields are so vast that this makes zero sense.

[MarkT]

Yet for the last 18 years, our department has not been able to hire a qualified American candidate for a tenure track physics faculty position. Every single tenure track hire, and almost all of the candidates on the short list, were foreigners.

I am OK with that as long as Employers offer competitive wages and can show that US citizens did not really want the position.

 

BUT

 

an example I saw on TV news

In California,  a company laid off almost all it's IT workers and replaced them with H1B workers (which they had to train)

It was inconceivable to me that our laws allowed it!

 

[ I am a fiscal conservative and believe in fair market competiton]

[regentrude]

I am OK with that as long as Employers offer competitive wages and can show that US citizens did not really want the position.

 

we have to do a lot of paperwork to demonstrate the above, including listing, for each single applicant, why the person did not make the short list. It is a public institution, and salaries are public.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[Mama Geek]

The thing that blows my mind in engineering is that it is difficult to change industries even though the work is very similar.  Dh has talked to several people who wanted his qualifications other than he had not worked in their specific industry.

[JanetC]

The good American candidates apparently can find more attractive positions elsewhere and do not have to stoop to teaching at a public university - which must mean there are jobs in industry that pay well.

 

I don't know how it works in academia, but in industry if you cannot recruit who you want you would research where your desired candidates (the "good" American physicists, whoever they are) are choosing to apply and work instead and why.

 

[regentrude]

I don't know how it works in academia, but in industry if you cannot recruit who you want you would research where your desired candidates (the "good" American physicists, whoever they are) are choosing to apply and work instead and why.

 

We all know that industry salaries are much higher than academia salaries. Add an unattractive location that people don't flock to just because that's where they want to live. No secrets here.

But it means that the people find jobs elsewhere.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[Frances]

I think the big mythology is creating this one bucket called "STEM" and assuming lots of commonality across it. The job market for computer science graduates is completely different than for, say marine biologists, even though they are both "STEM".

Yes, that is the main thrust of the article. Computer science is just about the only STEM field where there are enough jobs for grads who want to stay in their field.

[MarkT]

Yes, that is the main thrust of the article. Computer science is just about the only STEM field where there are enough jobs for grads who want to stay in their field.

unless you are an IT worker over 40 -  see my post above

[regentrude]

Yes, that is the main thrust of the article. Computer science is just about the only STEM field where there are enough jobs for grads who want to stay in their field.

 

I am wondering about the predictions for future jobs, because I do not get the sentiment of gloom from our undergraduates. Most of them are engineering majors, and they seem to be very positive about their job prospects. Currently, the average starting salary for graduates from my university is $61k. Employers flock to the career fair. 

[Frances]

The thing that blows my mind in engineering is that it is difficult to change industries even though the work is very similar. Dh has talked to several people who wanted his qualifications other than he had not worked in their specific industry.

Yes, this is what bothers me so much about companies that are not willing to take on any of the risk or costs associated with training people who have a very solid foundation. As mentioned in the article, there are now businesses who do the screening and training for very qualified people wanting to get into some of the in-demand fields, and then they are paid by the hiring company afterwards.

[Frances]

I am OK with that as long as Employers offer competitive wages and can show that US citizens did not really want the position.

 

BUT

 

an example I saw on TV news

In California, a company laid off almost all it's IT workers and replaced them with H1B workers (which they had to train)

It was inconceivable to me that our laws allowed it!

 

[ I am a fiscal conservative and believe in fair market competiton]

Academia is exempt from the requirement that there is not a qualified US citizen. One of our good friends from grad school found this out the hard way. He's the only PhD student I've ever known who was given an interview and job offer everywhere he applied while in grad school. A few years later his grad advisor retired, and he really wanted the job because he loved the school and both his and his wife's families lived in the area. He was one of three finalists, but the job was given to a foreign PhD who had also been in his advisor's research group, although she had won none of the teaching and research awards he did.

[Arcadia]

I am wondering about the predictions for future jobs, because I do not get the sentiment of gloom from our undergraduates. Most of them are engineering majors, and they seem to be very positive about their job prospects. Currently, the average starting salary for graduates from my university is $61k. Employers flock to the career fair.

My husband is doing internships and job interviews next week at a very popular state university with an acceptance rate of 18%. His area is more of material science so they recruit from physics, electrical engineering, mechanical engineering, computer engineering. Applications is far more than openings. My husband’s employer pays well for internships and fresh graduates but not as high as Facebook or Google which they are near to. Those would probably get a flood of applicants.

 

There are plenty of well known employers doing recruitment on state universities campuses and the vibe is positive. However whether there are enough job openings for all graduates is unknown regardless of starting salary because alumni self report about employment.

 

There is a spoken directive to increase the diversity when recruiting especially to up the number of lady hires. A lady engineer was sent to Chicago just to recruit ladies at the job fair.

 

My kids aren’t getting a positive vibe about engineering job prospects even though my youngest is still keen on mechanical/aeronautical engineering. They have tag along to conferences, job fairs and recruitment drives as many bring families along.

[Jen500]

So my seniors (high school) are interested in some kind of engineering. What kind of specific programs/careers should I tell them to look into? Am I understanding that there are more mechanical engineering graduates than there are jobs available, for example? Is that the general gist of this? (I realize part of it is lumping all STEM careers together)

[Frances]

I am OK with that as long as Employers offer competitive wages and can show that US citizens did not really want the position.

 

BUT

 

an example I saw on TV news

In California, a company laid off almost all it's IT workers and replaced them with H1B workers (which they had to train)

It was inconceivable to me that our laws allowed it!

 

[ I am a fiscal conservative and believe in fair market competiton]

There have been many articles about H1B visa abuse. For the type above, I think companies often get around the requirement by outsourcing some or all of their IT work, and then it's the outsourcing company that is responsible for the hires.

 

In other cases where the hiring is more individual, from friends that work for some of the big multinational companies that use lots of H1B visas, they say it is quite easy to write very specific lists of requirements that only the person they want meets. They say it's not that they are trying to save money or outsource work, but that they want to hire exactly who they want to hire, and they don't care where they are from. Virtually all of their foreign hires went to grad school in the US.

[Mama Geek]

So my seniors (high school) are interested in some kind of engineering. What kind of specific programs/careers should I tell them to look into? Am I understanding that there are more mechanical engineering graduates than there are jobs available, for example? Is that the general gist of this? (I realize part of it is lumping all STEM careers together)

Right now contract work is paying between $65-$95 an hour with $75 being typical with per diem for stress analysis in the aerospace industry.  I don't know what else is high paying right now but that one is.

[Arcadia]

So my seniors (high school) are interested in some kind of engineering. What kind of specific programs/careers should I tell them to look into? Am I understanding that there are more mechanical engineering graduates than there are jobs available, for example?

Mechanical engineering itself is very broad. Depending on the college, It can cover prosthetics, material science, aeronautical engineering, industrial engineering and more at the undergraduate level.

 

If they intend to stay put, they should really talk to the career center staff at the local state universities and ask detailed questions at engineering open houses. Look around at what local employers are there in their field of interest.

 

Link is to San Jose State University salary survey for 2014-2015 graduates. You can see the self reported data is small compared to enrollment so it is hard to tell what the employment market is really like from that report. It has a 51% acceptance rate for engineering freshmen last Fall.

http://www.sjsu.edu/careercenter/docs/Salary%20Survey%20Report%202014-15.pdf

Edited November 3, 2017 by Arcadia

[regentrude]

Academia is exempt from the requirement that there is not a qualified US citizen. 

 

I do not believe that is correct. Can you point me to a source that supports this? I know we have to do the complete prevailing wage certification when we want to sponsor an H1B visa. Of course the situation is entirely different when the "foreign" candidate does not require a work visa, because is a legal permanent resident. There are no rules that citizens must have preference over permanent legal residents.

 

I am sorry that your friend did not receive the position he wanted, but there can be many reasons why a finalist is not chosen and another candidate is considered the better fit. Fit and paper qualification are not the same thing. 

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[Crimson Wife]

Do you think there is a problem with your recruitment process, pay, working conditions, etc. versus other possible employers, or do you think it's just because there are no American candidates out there?

 

STEM fields often require YEARS of low-paying, relatively short-term post-doctoral fellowships before the individual can compete for a permanent tenure-track position. I graduated college in '99 and many of my classmates who did a PhD. in a STEM field are STILL toiling away in post-doc positions.

 

Whereas DH's old employer (a "bulge bracket" investment bank) would hire newly minted PhD.'s in quantitative fields at $150+k base and opportunities for up to 50% performance bonus to do equity research. DH was actually in the minority on his team for having a MBA rather than a PhD.

 

You'd have to REALLY love your research to turn down the kind of money you can make in industry.

[8filltheheart]

So my seniors (high school) are interested in some kind of engineering. What kind of specific programs/careers should I tell them to look into? Am I understanding that there are more mechanical engineering graduates than there are jobs available, for example? Is that the general gist of this? (I realize part of it is lumping all STEM careers together)

 

My #1 recommendation for students majoring in an engineering field is NOT to put 4 yr graduation as their highest priority but to instead plan to incorporate an additional yr for co-oping.  Co-oping is an excellent way for students to get on the job experience.  Kids graduating with high GPAs (think 3.5 above for your typical state university) and co-op experience will most likely have job offers at graduation.  (Even in the height of unemployment in 2011, the yr my ds graduated, he had multiple job offers.)

[Arcadia]

Academia is exempt from the requirement that there is not a qualified US citizen.

There is no cap but academia still goes through the H1B process

 

“The H-1B visa has an annual numerical limit "cap" of 65,000 visas each fiscal year. The first 20,000 petitions filed on behalf of beneficiaries with a U.S. master’s degree or higher are exempt from the cap. Additionally, H-1B workers who are petitioned for or employed at an institution of higher education or its affiliated or related nonprofit entities or a nonprofit research organization, or a government research organization are not subject to this numerical cap.â€

https://www.uscis.gov/working-united-states/temporary-workers/h-1b-specialty-occupations-dod-cooperative-research-and-development-project-workers-and-fashion-models

 

ETA:

My husband’s undergraduate dissertation project supervisor was recruited with H1B for laser research at U of Nebraska. It is very niche. My husband has no interest in academia even though the local state universities pay better than his pay in private sector.

UCB payscale for lecturers http://www.ucop.edu/academic-personnel-programs/_files/1718/1718-adj-scales/t3.pdf

Edited November 3, 2017 by Arcadia

[Jen500]

My #1 recommendation for students majoring in an engineering field is NOT to put 4 yr graduation as their highest priority but to instead plan to incorporate an additional yr for co-oping.  Co-oping is an excellent way for students to get on the job experience.  Kids graduating with high GPAs (think 3.5 above for your typical state university) and co-op experience will most likely have job offers at graduation.  (Even in the height of unemployment in 2011, the yr my ds graduated, he had multiple job offers.)

One of my son's top pick for a college is RIT, because it has 2 semesters and a summer of co-op. So it's 5 years to finish. It's an expensive school though, so he may not be able to go there. I'll check his other college choices to see which have co-ops.

Thanks everyone for the input.

[Arcadia]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/education/edlife/stem-jobs-industry-careers.html

The graph at the top of that article is too simplistic though. Many disciplines can fulfill the small shortfall in computer science graduates. It is also an industry that can take certifications and job track record over the need for a bachelors degree. I have done hiring, my husband is involved in hiring.

Edited November 3, 2017 by Arcadia

[Kassia]

My #1 recommendation for students majoring in an engineering field is NOT to put 4 yr graduation as their highest priority but to instead plan to incorporate an additional yr for co-oping.  Co-oping is an excellent way for students to get on the job experience.  Kids graduating with high GPAs (think 3.5 above for your typical state university) and co-op experience will most likely have job offers at graduation.  (Even in the height of unemployment in 2011, the yr my ds graduated, he had multiple job offers.)

 

I agree that co-ops are very important and I know of several universities that require them for graduation.  My three sons (engineers) chose not to do co-ops, but all three were fortunate to have good summer internships and all had multiple job offers well before graduation.  All three were offered jobs at the companies where they had internships - two went on to accept those offers.  

[Arcadia]

I agree that co-ops are very important and I know of several universities that require them for graduation. My three sons (engineers) chose not to do co-ops, but all three were fortunate to have good summer internships and all had multiple job offers well before graduation. All three were offered jobs at the companies where they had internships - two went on to accept those offers.

For kids that aren’t likely to proactively look for internships, having compulsory co-ops helps. My alma mater has compulsory internship as a requirement so even the most shy or “passive†person gets an internship. Many companies will hire their interns unless the intern really messed up.

 

My kid who likes engineering is the one who is “passive†and would need compulsory co-ops. My brother is similarly passive and benefited from compulsory internships for mechanical engineering. He would have zero relevant job experience prior to graduation otherwise.

[Frances]

I do not believe that is correct. Can you point me to a source that supports this? I know we have to do the complete prevailing wage certification when we want to sponsor an H1B visa. Of course the situation is entirely different when the "foreign" candidate does not require a work visa, because is a legal permanent resident. There are no rules that citizens must have preference over permanent legal residents.

 

I am sorry that your friend did not receive the position he wanted, but there can be many reasons why a finalist is not chosen and another candidate is considered the better fit. Fit and paper qualification are not the same thing.

I'm sorry I spoke too broadly, Arcadia explains it well below.

 

There's no doubt my friend was supremely qualified for the position, although the foreign women may have been a better "fit". They both went to the same grad school and worked in the same research group. He won numerous teaching and research awards, and she did not. As I stated previously, he was also offered an interview and a job at every university he applied to when in grad school. He was also very successful at the job he accepted before applying to go back to his grad university. He didn't just look good on paper. I've literally never known anyone with a freshly minted PhD who was more sought after. But his ultimate goal was an academic job close to extended family, and this was the only one available. And unfortunately it was the the only job he was not offered.

[regentrude]

There's no doubt my friend was supremely qualified for the position, although the foreign women may have been a better "fit". They both went to the same grad school and worked in the same research group. He won numerous teaching and research awards, and she did not. As I stated previously, he was also offered an interview and a job at every university he applied to when in grad school. He was also very successful at the job he accepted before applying to go back to his grad university. He didn't just look good on paper. I've literally never known anyone with a freshly minted PhD who was more sought after. But his ultimate goal was an academic job close to extended family, and this was the only one available. And unfortunately it was the the only job he was not offered.

 

I do not doubt that your friend was immensely qualified. I was merely trying to say that sometimes the qualification is not the last deciding factor. When I talk about "fit", this can be how their precise research topic fits into the overall structure of the department. Highly qualified people may not get a position simply because their research is too close to the area of another researcher at the institution, or conversely because another candidate's research is seen has having more potential for a specific collaboration with a present researcher, etc. 

 

And then there are political decisions, like initiatives of certain institutions to increase the number of female faculty, complete with incentives to departments to hire more females in STEM fields (don't get me started).  That was the first thing that came to mind when you mentioned the chosen candidate was female.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[RootAnn]

 Kids graduating with high GPAs (think 3.5 above for your typical state university) and co-op experience will most likely have job offers at graduation.

 

. . . Unless you are found multiple times on your smart phone instead of doing the work you've been assigned, in which case, the company will specifically not extend a job offer to you. (Acquaintance's kid may have done this at the two separate companies he co-oped, according to the grapevine.)

[Frances]

I do not doubt that your friend was immensely qualified. I was merely trying to say that sometimes the qualification is not the last deciding factor. When I talk about "fit", this can be how their precise research topic fits into the overall structure of the department. Highly qualified people may not get a position simply because their research is too close to the area of another researcher at the institution, or conversely because another candidate's research is seen has having more potential for a specific collaboration with a present researcher, etc.

 

And then there are political decisions, like initiatives of certain institutions to increase the number of female faculty, complete with incentives to departments to hire more females in STEM fields (don't get me started). That was the first thing that came to mind when you mentioned the chosen candidate was female.

I think your latter hypothesis is correct, as he was basically told as much confidentially by several people in the department. He is in a very specialized field with very few women.

[regentrude]

I think your latter hypothesis is correct, as he was basically told as much confidentially by several people in the department. He is in a very specialized field with very few women.

 

I have a big problem with these policies. Not only is it problematic because hiring based on gender is discriminatory, but more importantly, it cheapens the woman's accomplishment. She will have to wonder whether she was hired based on her qualification or based on her gender, and it will be easy for people to dismiss a female's accomplishment because "she just got the job because she's a woman". (Same way it used to be "because she's sleeping with the boss...")

As a woman, I find this insulting and I don't think it does female advancement any favors.

Edited November 3, 2017 by regentrude

[Gwen in VA]

 

"it will be easy for people to dismiss a female's accomplishment because "she's been hired because she's a woman". (Same way it used to be "because she's sleeping with the boss...")

As a woman, I find this insulting."

 

Yes and yes. My older two kids are both in STEM. My oldest is a daughter with a Ph.D. in a STEM field from the #2 department in her field in the country. She was wined and dined. There were special programs to help women learn how to interview, how to navigate the job-hunt process. There were dinners where only female candidates were invited.

 

My son, also with impeccable STEM credentials, has never been offered any of those perks.

 

BTW, I was accepted to a top STEM school during a year many moons ago when diversity first became a thing. I've always wondered if I would have been accepted if I hadn't been female....

 

It's enough to make a cynic of me......

 

[Kassia]

Yes and yes. My older two kids are both in STEM. My oldest is a daughter with a Ph.D. in a STEM field from the #2 department in her field in the country. She was wined and dined. There were special programs to help women learn how to interview, how to navigate the job-hunt process. There were dinners where only female candidates were invited.

 

My son, also with impeccable STEM credentials, has never been offered any of those perks.

 

.....

 

My son (electrical engineer) was close friends with a female student in college and helped her through their engineering classes a lot.  Her GPA, experience, and other activities weren't even close to my son's, yet she was offered much better internships and job offers than my son was.  I think one company even told her she wasn't qualified, but she was so nice that they wanted her.  My son was happy for her, but it was hard for him at times - especially the first summer internship when she was making 2 1/2 times his salary.

 

My oldest son (computer engineer), who works for a huge company, told me that his company tries hard to recruit females because there are so few working there.  

Edited November 3, 2017 by Kassia

[Frances]

I have a big problem with these policies. Not only is it problematic because hiring based on gender is discriminatory, but more importantly, it cheapens the woman's accomplishment. She will have to wonder whether she was hired based on her qualification or based on her gender, and it will be easy for people to dismiss a female's accomplishment because "she just got the job because she's a woman". (Same way it used to be "because she's sleeping with the boss...")

As a woman, I find this insulting and I don't think it does female advancement any favors.

I completely agree. When I was in grad school, I had more than one male colleague tell me that I would have no problem finding a great job simply because I was a woman.

[8filltheheart]

. . . Unless you are found multiple times on your smart phone instead of doing the work you've been assigned, in which case, the company will specifically not extend a job offer to you. (Acquaintance's kid may have done this at the two separate companies he co-oped, according to the grapevine.)

Goes without saying. No accounting for stupidity that thwarts opportunity.

[Matryoshka]

I completely agree. When I was in grad school, I had more than one male colleague tell me that I would have no problem finding a great job simply because I was a woman.

 

Yeah, but then... reality.

 

I was thinking dd would be in huge demand and get some really good scholarships because she had a 34 ACT, AP Calc, AP Physics C, AP CompSci, Robotics club for 4 years including programming lead (where she was the ONLY girl), right around a 4 GPA.

 

Well, she got in everywhere and got merit everywhere, but only one non-state school even came within a few thousand of our EFC.  Yeah, they didn't want her that much.  She's at the state school (her choice).

 

She just had her first coop interview.  She really liked the company vibe, but she noticed that there were NO women there, except the HR lady.  Hmmmm...  if women are having such an easy time getting hired, where ARE they?  I've heard many stories about hostile work environments in tech and hard science fields for women, so maybe they get hired, but after being ignored/sidelined/belittled or even harassed, they go elsewhere.  I very much hope that's not how it turns out for dd.

 

She said it didn't bother her that there were no women at the company she interviewed at, as she's used to being the only, or almost the only, female...

 

And by the way, she is top of her class with a 4.0 average with a double CompSci/Math major.  She's not getting preferential treatment over 'more qualified' males.  At all.  She still gets guys 'mansplaining' how to do things she can do way better than they can.  

Edited November 3, 2017 by Matryoshka

[MarkT]

I have a big problem with these policies. Not only is it problematic because hiring based on gender is discriminatory, but more importantly, it cheapens the woman's accomplishment. She will have to wonder whether she was hired based on her qualification or based on her gender, and it will be easy for people to dismiss a female's accomplishment because "she just got the job because she's a woman". (Same way it used to be "because she's sleeping with the boss...")

As a woman, I find this insulting and I don't think it does female advancement any favors.

Unfortunately this is common practice now for hiring and promotion in certain previously male dominated job sectors such as Engineering and I agree with the "doubt" assessment that comes with it.

[Arcadia]

Hmmmm... if women are having such an easy time getting hired, where ARE they?

The opposite coast :)

The dept my husband is in has about half lady engineers but all foreign born. It’s dealing with material science though and ladies in material science has more choices of employment so even his dept find it hard to recruit more ladies. Also Google, Apple and HP pay better so the ladies jump ship for better pay.

 

His boss is actually family friendly. All the parents have been taking paid time off to chauffeur their kids for doctor, dentist, optical appointments as long as they check their emails every few hours.

 

News article How Female-Focused Job Boards Like Hire Tech Ladies Promote Diversity In Tech

https://www.forbes.com/sites/laurencebradford/2016/10/26/how-female-only-job-boards-can-promote-diversity-in-tech/#628fea3828dd

Edited November 4, 2017 by Arcadia

[Wheres Toto]

The recruitment process is standardized for this type of position. The working conditions are comparable to those of any  faculty at any institution.

The American candidates who apply are below the level of the foreign applicants. So we are not talking about people not being satisfied with the negotiations after the job offer who decline; they do not make the short list.

The good American candidates apparently can find more attractive positions elsewhere and do not have to stoop to teaching at a public university - which must mean there are jobs in industry that pay well.

ETA: there seems to be some variation across disciplines within physics. Nobody knows why that is.

 

My last job I worked in Medical Education for a healthcare marketing company.  A VERY large healthcare marketing company with offices around the world.  About 70% of the people in our department were science PhDs.  A couple were MDs.  I know many of them didn't originally intend to go into industry but it paid MUCH better than academia.   

 

IME, PhDs also aren't uncommon in pharmaceutical companies.

[Reefgazer]

Barring a few fields, there is not a STEM shortage in this country.  There is just a shortage of STEM trained people who will work for peanuts. 

I don't know what annoys me more, continuing to hear about the mythical STEM shortage in this country or companies, especially very profitable ones, that won't take people with strong analytical abilities who successfully conquered very difficult majors and invest some time and money training them. Stop whining about a shortage of qualified workers and do something about it yourself instead of expecting fully trained people with years of precise experience to magically appear in front of you.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/education/edlife/stem-jobs-industry-careers.html

I'm very fortunate that the small, local software company I got on with after taking several years off when my son was young was willing to take a chance on me. I literally had zero experience, education, or training related to anything they did. But they basically said, you have a STEM degree from a top school, so we trust you will be successful here. Six months later when the company was sold, I was completely up to speed and was one of only four employees retained by the new company.

 

[Reefgazer]

Yes to the bold.  Caveat:  I am speaking here for chemistry and biology only, not physics, so I can't speak to your experience specifically.  But when I worked for large companies in the biotech and pharmaceutical industries, we had a glut of high quality people applying for jobs; the job market was extremely competitive.  Most people who interviewed were American born and were leaving academia because the pay in academia didn't comfortably support a family and was not commensurate with the level of education these people had.  If academia paid more, qualified Americans will show up for interviews.  It's the same reason why California vegetable farmers can't find Americans to pick their crops - because Americans won't work that hard for such low wages.

The recruitment process is standardized for this type of position. The working conditions are comparable to those of any  faculty at any institution.

The American candidates who apply are below the level of the foreign applicants. So we are not talking about people not being satisfied with the negotiations after the job offer who decline; they do not make the short list.

The good American candidates apparently can find more attractive positions elsewhere and do not have to stoop to teaching at a public university - which must mean there are jobs in industry that pay well.

ETA: there seems to be some variation across disciplines within physics. Nobody knows why that is.

 

Edited November 4, 2017 by reefgazer

[Reefgazer]

The bolded is exactly what I have seen, as well.  I might add that the requirement to advertise the position is buried in small print in the back of some obscure journal to ensure there are no other qualified applicants of any particular nationality sees it.  The companies I worked for wanted to hire people they wanted, and while most of them were American, when they wanted a particular worker who was foreign-born, this is how they played the game.

There have been many articles about H1B visa abuse. For the type above, I think companies often get around the requirement by outsourcing some or all of their IT work, and then it's the outsourcing company that is responsible for the hires.

In other cases where the hiring is more individual, from friends that work for some of the big multinational companies that use lots of H1B visas, they say it is quite easy to write very specific lists of requirements that only the person they want meets. They say it's not that they are trying to save money or outsource work, but that they want to hire exactly who they want to hire, and they don't care where they are from. Virtually all of their foreign hires went to grad school in the US.

 

[Bootsie]

The recruitment process is standardized for this type of position. The working conditions are comparable to those of any  faculty at any institution.

The American candidates who apply are below the level of the foreign applicants. So we are not talking about people not being satisfied with the negotiations after the job offer who decline; they do not make the short list.

The good American candidates apparently can find more attractive positions elsewhere and do not have to stoop to teaching at a public university - which must mean there are jobs in industry that pay well.

ETA: there seems to be some variation across disciplines within physics. Nobody knows why that is.

How much of this is due to graduate school admissions?  I am in in finance, which especially compared to other business disciplines, is seeing the same phenomenon.  When you go through who is receiving a PhD in finance, the majority at many schools are international students.  

 

A colleague of mine who is in physics suggested that you see this phenomenon more in physics than other fields because many of the top government and private sector jobs for PhD physicists require high level security clearance, which is easier for Americans to get--so the pool for academics is tilted toward highly qualified foreigners and lower ranked Americans who couldn't get the top jobs outside of academia.  

[regentrude]

How much of this is due to graduate school admissions?  I am in in finance, which especially compared to other business disciplines, is seeing the same phenomenon.  When you go through who is receiving a PhD in finance, the majority at many schools are international students.  

 

A colleague of mine who is in physics suggested that you see this phenomenon more in physics than other fields because many of the top government and private sector jobs for PhD physicists require high level security clearance, which is easier for Americans to get--so the pool for academics is tilted toward highly qualified foreigners and lower ranked Americans who couldn't get the top jobs outside of academia.  

 

Yes, in physics, about half of the PhDs are awarded to foreigners.

 

The thought with the security clearance is interesting, but I am not convinced it outweighs the money aspect. 

Edited November 4, 2017 by regentrude