1,200 biomedical jobs in Ireland 'unfilled'

dvcireland

http://insideireland.ie/2011/03/30/1200-biomedical-jobs-in-ireland-unfilled-13700/

CatFromHue

i dont know about the number 1,200 but if you look on any job sites the majority of the engineering jobs are in the medical device / pharma industry.

flash1080

The HR/recruitment people must be ****.

flash1080

I know of a large multinational company in this sector that made billions in profit last year but were looking for around 7 engineering graduates to work for free for 9 months. With that approach it's not surprising they aren't able to fill jobs.

Irish_Elect_Eng

I work for a Med. Dev. Manufacturer and frankly it is close to impossible to get the people that we want to fill highly skilled jobs, particularly experienced specialist engineers.

The last two high end engineering jobs that we advertised went to candidates from Eastern Europe and from India. Believe me we would have hired from Ireland if we could have, the hiring process is much cheaper in Ireland it costs several thousand euro to hire through a agency and more for an international agency.

Our third level colleges do not produce enough engineers in the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country at the moment. And on top of that many of our brightest and best were sucked into the construction industry through the boom years further reducing the numbers of experienced engineers available to the manufacturing industries at the moment.

flash1080

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

Our third level colleges do not produce enough engineers in the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country at the moment. And on top of that many of our brightest and best were sucked into the construction industry through the boom years further reducing the numbers of experienced engineers available to the manufacturing industries at the moment.

There appears to be more than enough mechanical, manufacturing, and biomedical engineers (the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country) graduating at the moment, they're leaving the country in droves. Why aren't those engineers who were working in the construction industry walking into those jobs?

pljudge321

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

Our third level colleges do not produce enough engineers in the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country at the moment. And on top of that many of our brightest and best were sucked into the construction industry through the boom years further reducing the numbers of experienced engineers available to the manufacturing industries at the moment.

What specialities are these as a matter of interest? From the amount of internships and the class sizes being advertised in my college I'm guessing its Chemical and E&E.

Turbulent Bill

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

I work for a Med. Dev. Manufacturer and frankly it is close to impossible to get the people that we want to fill highly skilled jobs, particularly experienced specialist engineers.

Could you not find suitable candidates full-stop, or just not find ones who would accept the package on offer? Was there any opportunity to promote from within and then hire less-experienced replacements for them?

I've noticed that requirements lists for a lot of job adverts (for experienced positions) are incredibly detailed, to the point that very few people even qualify for consideration. Browse the open positions at Intel (for example) and most require 5+years experience on very particular processes as a minimum. I'm sure many people would have the skillset to do this job (or are already doing a closely-related job), but aren't elligible because the entry conditions are so restrictive.

It's worth bearing in mind too that the recession isn't hitting some eng industries. I've friends who are constantly being headhunted (mainly experienced EEs), and the market is very active for them.

dan_d

To be fair, I graduated 5 years ago and at the time, the Chemical and EE classes had about 30 and 20 in them respectively. That was out of a year of about 230 engineers. The bulk of the students were in Civil and Mech classes. I'd imagine Chem and E&E engineers with 5 years or so experience are in short supply, given those numbers.

aidanki

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

I work for a Med. Dev. Manufacturer and frankly it is close to impossible to get the people that we want to fill highly skilled jobs, particularly experienced specialist engineers.

The last two high end engineering jobs that we advertised went to candidates from Eastern Europe and from India. Believe me we would have hired from Ireland if we could have, the hiring process is much cheaper in Ireland it costs several thousand euro to hire through a agency and more for an international agency.

Our third level colleges do not produce enough engineers in the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country at the moment. And on top of that many of our brightest and best were sucked into the construction industry through the boom years further reducing the numbers of experienced engineers available to the manufacturing industries at the moment.

what specialists you looking for

Dilbert75

I've not been recruiting in the last 12 months but, when I was, I found that there were a lot of candidates with little or no experience in regulated environments and very few with some experience. Those who had were normally moving for geographical reasons, those who hadn't were largely those who'd been working in construction-related fields prior to the bust and their experience often had little relevance to what we wanted.

That said, of the last two people I hired, one was working in med device and relocating and the other had not been working in med device but was so good & quick that I knew instantly he'd fit in perfectly. I was thankfully correct on both counts.

But had I not got those guys, I'd happily have done without rather than take the wrong candidate. The consequences of the wrong candidate, in a business where everything depends on absolute accuracy and completeness of documentation & process, could be very serious.

x in the city

dvcireland wrote: »

http://insideireland.ie/2011/03/30/1200-biomedical-jobs-in-ireland-unfilled-13700/

these jobs must be advertised with invisible ink, you may need to shine news papers up with uv light or something to actually see them

aidanki

i have 5yrs experience in biomedical company, in an FDA regulated environment.
Experience in line support, and projects.
certified green belt
Experienced in performing validations and detailed protocol and report wring and completing filings for FDA submission
Performing FAT and SAT for new equipment

so anyone wanting to recruit a biomed engineer send me a PM

dan_d

Have to say in my job hunting, almost every ad I see has all of the above requirements mentioned.

There's no hope for us civil engineers out there anymore.:(:(

folan

i have in the past been told i had not the right experience for a graduate job. I asked what the experience required was, was told 1 year in a similar role. I apoliogised and told them i was looking for a graduate role. it was a graduate role.

I dont know if its still the case, but when i was last looking for a job i found alot of places had the mentality that they could and should only hire the most qualified and expert people out there. there was very little for graduates.

aidanki

dan_d wrote: »

Have to say in my job hunting, almost every ad I see has all of the above requirements mentioned.

There's no hope for us civil engineers out there anymore.:(:(

that may be true but still not easy to get

I can get through the first day meeting the technical people but when it comes to meeting directors and HR managers my answers don't seem to be good enough

EngIreland

Spotted this on our LinkedIn group page.

May be of interest to some.

Experienced Process & Manufacturing Engineers required for Munster based roles in Pharma and Medical Device sectors

http://bit.ly/iiJlgk

Hope this helps.

Offy

aidanki wrote: »

that may be true but still not easy to get

I can get through the first day meeting the technical people but when it comes to meeting directors and HR managers my answers don't seem to be good enough

+1
Yesterday I had to explain the difference between a mechanical engineer and an electronic engineer to a recruitment consultant. I dont know if he didnt know the difference or if he is sending cv's to companies in the hope that they might just like the look of it but either way how can someone that knows so little about engineering be in a position to decide if an engineer can engineer?

dan_d

folan wrote: »

i have in the past been told i had not the right experience for a graduate job. I asked what the experience required was, was told 1 year in a similar role. I apoliogised and told them i was looking for a graduate role. it was a graduate role.

I dont know if its still the case, but when i was last looking for a job i found alot of places had the mentality that they could and should only hire the most qualified and expert people out there. there was very little for graduates.

Have noticed this - a role is advertised as a graduate position, but when you look at the details they want someone with 1-2 years experience in XYZ.
Not a grad myself, but you see this when hunting.
It's very,very hard for me with experience, it must be nearly impossible for grads.

Irish_Elect_Eng

aidanki wrote: »

what specialists you looking for

I need primarily Electronic and Mechanical Engineers (For My Own Group)

Our Company also routinely hires Manufacturing and Quality Engineers to work in operations and N.P.I. projects.

Irish_Elect_Eng

Dilbert75 wrote: »

I've not been recruiting in the last 12 months but, when I was, I found that there were a lot of candidates with little or no experience in regulated environments and very few with some experience. Those who had were normally moving for geographical reasons, those who hadn't were largely those who'd been working in construction-related fields prior to the bust and their experience often had little relevance to what we wanted.

That said, of the last two people I hired, one was working in med device and relocating and the other had not been working in med device but was so good & quick that I knew instantly he'd fit in perfectly. I was thankfully correct on both counts.

But had I not got those guys, I'd happily have done without rather than take the wrong candidate. The consequences of the wrong candidate, in a business where everything depends on absolute accuracy and completeness of documentation & process, could be very serious.

Your experience echoes mine to a great extent.

Most candidates that present for interview have not done their homework and are unaware of the particular requirements of the med. dev. sector. Only a handful bother to do research on the company and even fewer bother to look up the standards under which they will be working. Comments like "Ya, I heard there was a lot of paperwork in the medical industry" are common.

In particular your comments on hiring the wrong candidate. Hiring a unsuitable or disruptive candidate can not only result in poor performance of the candidate but can also lower the performance of the group as a whole. It is hard to hire in Ireland to see if a candidate will fit into a role, as it is difficult to let the failed candidate go due to our labor laws.

But thankfully we have hired some very good folks, smart , qualified, experienced and ambitious. Often these come to us from internal promotions, through industry contacts or directly referenced by people already working within the company. (When CVs come in from job agencies only 1 in 5 are relevant enough to the job to read, but that is more of a problem with the agencies & HR rather than with the candidates themselves)

Dilbert75

folan wrote: »

i dont know if its still the case, but when i was last looking for a job i found alot of places had the mentality that they could and should only hire the most qualified and expert people out there. there was very little for graduates.

I'll make no apologies for hiring the best and most experienced person I can get a budget for. Someone coming out of college with no experience will cost a lot in terms of training, experience, etc. If I can possibly get a budget for someone who's been broken in, in a work sense, I will do that. College is little preparation for work. That's why having co-op / summer experience is so valuable. If you can get past the point where you need to be closely supervised, and you can make intelligent decisions for yourself, you're a much more valuable employee. College doesn't teach you that, unfortunately. Nor do they teach you the fundamentals of what an Engineer does in a Med Device company, while they're waiting to become the company's no.1 new product design Engineer.

Its a recruiter's market now, unlike a few years ago. Only problem is getting good people to leave permanent jobs to go somewhere they might be on 6 months probation. People are very adverse to uncertainty at the moment.

Offy

Dilbert75 wrote: »

Its a recruiter's market now, unlike a few years ago. Only problem is getting good people to leave permanent jobs to go somewhere they might be on 6 months probation. People are very adverse to uncertainty at the moment.

Uncertainty is part of any position in this economic climate. As the title of this thread says "1,200 biomedical jobs in Ireland 'unfilled'". The jobs are out there, 1,200 of them but the salary has to make it worthwhile and a lot of companies are using the recession as an excuse to offer 'Tesco salaries'. Engineers are skilled workers that make a lot of money for companies, their salary should reflect this. Social welfare offers more than some of the engineering roles been advertised at the moment never mine Tescos.

Irish_Elect_Eng

Offy wrote: »

Uncertainty is part of any position in this economic climate. As the title of this thread says "1,200 biomedical jobs in Ireland 'unfilled'". The jobs are out there, 1,200 of them but the salary has to make it worthwhile and a lot of companies are using the recession as an excuse to offer 'Tesco salaries'. Engineers are skilled workers that make a lot of money for companies, their salary should reflect this. Social welfare offers more than some of the engineering roles been advertised at the moment never mine Tescos.

This is where you have to balance a "job" against a "career"

Sometime you have to take that crappy job to get in the door.

Most good companies will adjust wages to ability quickly enough to avoid losing a valuable employee once you have proven yourself.

folan

Dilbert75 wrote: »

I'll make no apologies for hiring the best and most experienced person I can get a budget for. Someone coming out of college with no experience will cost a lot in terms of training, experience, etc. If I can possibly get a budget for someone who's been broken in, in a work sense, I will do that. College is little preparation for work. That's why having co-op / summer experience is so valuable. If you can get past the point where you need to be closely supervised, and you can make intelligent decisions for yourself, you're a much more valuable employee. College doesn't teach you that, unfortunately. Nor do they teach you the fundamentals of what an Engineer does in a Med Device company, while they're waiting to become the company's no.1 new product design Engineer.

Its a recruiter's market now, unlike a few years ago. Only problem is getting good people to leave permanent jobs to go somewhere they might be on 6 months probation. People are very adverse to uncertainty at the moment.

I understand this entirely, and in no way shape or form dispute it. However, my issue was not with such jobs, but with them being advertised as Graduate positions. By both my and your definition, graduates dont have these skills. So Graduates (myself included) applied for these jobs, just to be turned away and in cases left so demoralised by employeers who said one thing in a job spec and another in an interview.

However, I also have a problem with this idea that you only get your moneys worth with the best and most experienced. Risk taking on an employers side has almost disappeared, and almost all employers now seem to believe that they have no duty to current or potential employees to train them, or to assist them furthering their educations. If your not the best of the best on day 1, its not good enough.

So I make no apologies for not being the most experienced, but I will continue to train myself to be better and apply myself to my work.

Offy

folan wrote: »

I understand this entirely, and in no way shape or form dispute it. However, my issue was not with such jobs, but with them being advertised as Graduate positions. By both my and your definition, graduates dont have these skills. So Graduates (myself included) applied for these jobs, just to be turned away and in cases left so demoralised by employeers who said one thing in a job spec and another in an interview.

However, I also have a problem with this idea that you only get your moneys worth with the best and most experienced. Risk taking on an employers side has almost disappeared, and almost all employers now seem to believe that they have no duty to current or potential employees to train them, or to assist them furthering their educations. If your not the best of the best on day 1, its not good enough.

So I make no apologies for not being the most experienced, but I will continue to train myself to be better and apply myself to my work.

+1 To many jobs are been advertised with graduate pay scales and experience required. As I stated in another thread I applied for a job within the last year only to be asked at the interview if I qualified for WPP. Ive worked in engineering since 1990, how could anyone that looked at my CV think I might qualify for WPP? Why did the employer advertise a minimum of 3 years experience if they were looking for a recent graduate? I do realise not all medical device companies are taking this attitude but those that are do so to exploit engineers. As long as this continues there will be 1,200 jobs unfilled.
I quit my last job to return to college because after the six month probationary period none of the things discussed at the interview stage were put on the table. Not the pay rise to bring my pay scale up to standard, not the continued educational support nor the in-house training. I was asked to wait another six months which I did and then I was asked to wait another year, to do so would have made me nothing more than a fool. The same employer was interviewed by a national paper and claimed they could not get skilled engineers. That employer lost five engineers in the year I left. At present I receive a larger income as a post grad student than I did working for that firm. Why should qualified experienced engineers work for less than student income? To advance their career? No advancement is made by working for such employers. Businesses primary objective is to turn profit, mine is no different.
folan you have the right attitude, continuous improvement. Keep it up and you will land the position you are after. Sometimes you just have to hold out till the right job comes along.

flash1080

Offy wrote: »

Uncertainty is part of any position in this economic climate. As the title of this thread says "1,200 biomedical jobs in Ireland 'unfilled'". The jobs are out there, 1,200 of them but the salary has to make it worthwhile and a lot of companies are using the recession as an excuse to offer 'Tesco salaries'. Engineers are skilled workers that make a lot of money for companies, their salary should reflect this. Social welfare offers more than some of the engineering roles been advertised at the moment never mine Tescos.

Companies are only fooling themselves with "Tesco salaries". I know of graduate engineering positions that are paying 20-35% less than the average starting salary for engineers, Tesco actually pay significantly more to graduates than that company :pac:. They'll struggle to get anyone to work for them and anyone they do get will be off like a shot when a better offer comes along.

Dilbert75

folan wrote: »

Risk taking on an employers side has almost disappeared, and almost all employers now seem to believe that they have no duty to current or potential employees to train them, or to assist them furthering their educations.

Sorry to break the news to you but employers have duty to nobody but themselves (and their shareholders, where applicable) - if, in their judgement, you don't represent the best option for their company, they would be negligent to offer a job to you as a less experienced or qualified person if they had a better candidate available. Its not a social service they're providing. Harsh but true.

So I make no apologies for not being the most experienced, but I will continue to train myself to be better and apply myself to my work.

Nor should you apologise. This approach is what will differentiate you from other applicants and lead to your success.

folan

Dilbert75 wrote: »

Sorry to break the news to you but employers have duty to nobody but themselves

And that attitude is costing them their current employees

jonnyfingers

I'd just like to say that I was working for a medical devices company in Waterford doing a job I was over-qualified for (I'm an Electronic/Controls Engineer). I stayed with the job hoping a better opportunity would come up internally. For years jobs were there but given to contractors and never advertised internally. So they paid more money to contractors, who were doing average jobs at best, rather than promote internally.

When an internal job eventually came available I had to fight to even apply for it. I was begrudgingly given an interview (even though the hiring manager told a friend of mine, he assumed privately! , that my interview was pointless as he had no intention of giving me the job. This guy had never even met me so not sure how he could form an opinion of me). Well needless to say I felt I aced the interview, had almost all the skills they were looking for and over 3 years knowledge of the company, policies, machinery, machine code, programming language....etc. I was also practically doing the job I was applying for already so I felt it was an easy decision. Turns out I didn't get the job but a buddy of one of the existing engineers did, who had no experience of the programming language or machines he would be working with. Last time I checked this guy is not exactly lighting the world on fire in the job and his lack of experience of the machinery is showing.

This was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. I sent the CV out and within a couple of months a rival company in the UK jumped at the chance to snap me up. I'm now doing the exact same job I originally applied for with the the rival company, and quite well I might add. The originaly company lost a good engineer and over 4 years knowledge and experience.

I'm happy here in the UK doing the new job but I am angry that I had to move to get the job I wanted when there was one the exact same at my old company. Sometimes the hiring practices of large companies have me scratching my head.

flash1080

flash1080 wrote: »

There appears to be more than enough mechanical, manufacturing, and biomedical engineers (the specialties required for the industries that are thriving in the country) graduating at the moment, they're leaving the country in droves. Why aren't those engineers who were working in the construction industry walking into those jobs?

Folks with construction experience aren't ideal matches for pharma and med device companies, they would have next to no idea of GMP, validation etc.

Irish_Elect_Eng

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

Most good companies will adjust wages to ability quickly enough to avoid losing a valuable employee once you have proven yourself.

They like playing hard ball though , back in 2004 I was working in a large plant for two years and had proven myself to an extent, I had worked successfully on a project and was lead for the next one. Other lads on the team who I knew had come in on significantly higher salary were not in lead roles. My direct supervisor entertained my request for a pay rise but HR wouldn't play ball. So I left, when I handed in my notice the department manager said he'd sort out the payrise to avoid losing me. Too late.

Years on I still see other folks in the same position, now in the current climate folks are slow to leave permanent positions and most good companies are all too aware of this and are quite happy not to adjust the wages according to folks abilities.

dvcireland

RoverJames wrote: »

Folks with construction experience aren't ideal matches for pharma and med device companies, they would have next to no idea of GMP, validation etc.

I know what you mean, but there are plenty of people from construction, oil and many other industries who work in the pharma sector, not too sure about medical devices. Most people involved in Validation and Quality would have a science backgound/qualificaton or have the neccesary training.

flash1080

RoverJames wrote: »

Folks with construction experience aren't ideal matches for pharma and med device companies, they would have next to no idea of GMP, validation etc.

They're not ideal but they shouldn't have a problem learning what's necessary to do jobs in those companies. The obvious thing is for companies to do is hire people and train them if they can't get people who meet their exacting requirements. If they're not prepared to do that with 1200 jobs unfilled you have to question wtf they're thinking.

Irish_Elect_Eng

flash1080 wrote: »

They're not ideal but they shouldn't have a problem learning what's necessary to do jobs in those companies. The obvious thing is for companies to do is hire people and train them if they can't get people who meet their exacting requirements. If they're not prepared to do that with 1200 jobs unfilled you have to question wtf they're thinking.

The jobs that are being referenced are "high technology" jobs, which by definition require the appropriate qualifications. This is enforced by the US FDA (Food and Drugs Administration) each company has to prove that their workers have the appropriate qualifications for their role.

The sad news is that when there are enough unfilled roles what the company will start to think is, where can I move to, to fill these jobs. That usually means the B.R.I.C.S. countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China & South Africa...etc.

Government policy on education is failing the industries that can pull us out of recession, back in the eighties, the government educated people for jobs that did not exist yet and it was a success allowing a lot of inward investment. We need to start the process all over again.

flash1080

Irish_Elect_Eng wrote: »

The jobs that are being referenced are "high technology" jobs, which by definition require the appropriate qualifications. This is enforced by the US FDA (Food and Drugs Administration) each company has to prove that their workers have the appropriate qualifications for their role.

The sad news is that when there are enough unfilled roles what the company will start to think is, where can I move to, to fill these jobs. That usually means the B.R.I.C.S. countries, Brazil, Russia, India, China & South Africa...etc.

Government policy on education is failing the industries that can pull us out of recession, back in the eighties, the government educated people for jobs that did not exist yet and it was a success allowing a lot of inward investment. We need to start the process all over again.

These companies have to train people if they want people, they simply won't get anyone "ready-made" to their exacting requirements. Some of them are so extreme that they want people to study/train in a way in which they will be of no use to any other company than themselves, they are completely clueless in this regard. There's also a few who have completely shot themselves in the foot by only deciding now that they want to hire fresh grads, because at this stage people have been (or will soon be) offered jobs, so the potential pool of talent has been hugely drained. Absolutely clueless.