Strongest recommendation to AVOID AIBS for scientists and research associates
Pros
-Compensation is slightly better than academic or university positions, although not enough given the housing and cost of living in Seattle. -Minimal grant funding ensures higher job security and considerably more money to accomplish goals. - Expectations on work hours are low compared to other scientific settings, making work life balance very good. The standard is being able to leave at 4PM everyday and work less than 8 hrs per day. No one works long hours, perhaps due to dissatisfaction with career track not providing any benefit to work harder.
Cons
-Level of job satisfaction and morale is very low. Scientists and research associates regularly discuss dissatisfaction. Scientists collectively have produced long lists of systemic issues and had to regularly meet with the chief scientific officer in attempts to resolve major problems. Many scientists regularly look for jobs in the tech industry and wish to leave biological research after working here. -There is a constant fear of having your scientific project cut and having years of work go to waste. Large departments such as the embryonic stem cell group have just been removed with almost no advance warning. -Scientific output is minimal given the resources. With few exceptions, most people that work here for many years and get very few publications or successes to put on their resume. It will hurt your career in many instances to work here versus somewhere else. -Many of the investigators and managers have no experience managing skilled staff and have strongly aggressive or antisocial personality types. - No career development track for scientists or research associates. Promotions are arbitrarily given without clear reasons other than being manager dependent.
