
• 美国国立卫生研究院(National Institutes of Health,NIH)解雇了约1,200名员工,这是前总统特朗普声称的削减成本计划的一部分。《财富》杂志采访的该机构雇员表示,对于被解雇的公共卫生工作者而言,他们在私营部门几乎找不到工作机会。许多科学家的研究高度依赖其所在实验室的特定条件,难以直接迁移至其他机构。另一些人则表示,扩大求职范围意味着只能申请那些要求较低的工作,相当于大材小用。
随着政府大规模裁员,一些联邦公共卫生雇员担忧自己在私营部门同样难寻出路。
据Axios报道,自特朗普第二届任期开始以来,约有3万名联邦雇员被解雇,这是总统声称的大幅削减开支计划的一部分。行业媒体Inside Health Policy援引众议院委员会及工作人员的电话会议内容称,其中约2,900名被解雇的雇员来自美国卫生与人力资源部,约1,200人来自全球最大的生物医学研究资助机构美国国立卫生研究院。该机构管理着近480亿美元的研究资金。NIH还宣布将削减数十亿美元的生物医学研究经费,并在社交媒体上表示,削减“间接”研究成本资助每年可节省40亿美元。
许多被解雇的NIH雇员拥有博士学位和多年专业领域培训经历,他们要么深陷漫长的申诉程序(向政府监察机构质疑解雇合法性),要么因联邦机构暂停招聘而求职无门。即使转向在私营部门就业,许多人也对前景感到悲观。
一位被解雇的NIH生物学家对《财富》杂志表示:“我花了20年才得到这份工作,现在却要思考如何转行。”她正努力争取复职,因此要求匿名。
NIH未回应《财富》杂志的置评请求。
“私营部门根本没有相关职位”
ADP的数据显示,美国私营企业2月新增7.7万个就业岗位,为去年7月以来最小增幅,较上个月各界预期的14.8万几乎腰斩。
随着私营部门就业遇冷,NIH员工对转行缺乏信心。一位在脑机接口研究实验室工作的NIH员工匿名指出,NIH实验室通常围绕首席研究员(PI)的专长量身打造,这意味着公私领域难有完全对口的职位。《财富》杂志知晓该员工身份。
她对《财富》杂志表示:“私营部门根本没有这样的职位。”
政府资助的研究有助于企业的技术发展:例如NIH资助并正在评估Apple Watch检测房颤(中风预警信号)的有效性。但该员工认为,政府资助的研究进展缓慢,私营部门往往没有兴趣进行这类研究。
该员工表示:“实验室不生产产品,而是孕育可能在20年后转化为产品的构想。没有风投会资助这种项目。我们虽不直接产出,但我们的研究成果,应该是私营企业乐于拥有的。”
"资历过高"的困境
那位被解雇的NIH生物学家在2019年入职。她表示,若到高校任职,要么面临资历过高的问题,要么因多年从事相关领域的研究而缺乏跨学科专长。
她表示:“他们不会聘请我担任助理科学家——那是给硕士学历或其他学历拥有者的职位。虽然总监级岗位符合我的经验水平,但他们也不会聘请我担任这类职位,因为我缺乏相关领域的运作经验。”
除了想方设法维持生计的压力外,员工更担忧裁员对科研未来的冲击。这位生物学家指出,实验室团队重建需耗时数年。与她共事的年轻研究生和研究员不仅面临合约终止,更可能因此对在公共机构工作感到厌倦。
上个月因不认同NIH的发展方向而辞职的前NIH执行秘书处主任内特·布劳特表示,政府公共卫生部门的新岗位或具有吸引力的岗位为数不多,正在危及科研未来。裁员后果已然显现,而长期的人员短缺和实验室研究中断将产生持续数十年的连锁反应。
布劳特强调:“NIH的生物医学进步不属于某个政党或国家,也不是只属于美国人。我们的事业将惠及全人类。”
他补充道:“我们正为狭隘的政治博弈赌上整整一代医学专家、研究人员和科学家的未来,这注定会酿成重大灾难。” (财富中文网)
译者:刘进龙
审校:汪皓
• 美国国立卫生研究院(National Institutes of Health,NIH)解雇了约1,200名员工,这是前总统特朗普声称的削减成本计划的一部分。《财富》杂志采访的该机构雇员表示,对于被解雇的公共卫生工作者而言,他们在私营部门几乎找不到工作机会。许多科学家的研究高度依赖其所在实验室的特定条件,难以直接迁移至其他机构。另一些人则表示,扩大求职范围意味着只能申请那些要求较低的工作,相当于大材小用。
随着政府大规模裁员,一些联邦公共卫生雇员担忧自己在私营部门同样难寻出路。
据Axios报道,自特朗普第二届任期开始以来,约有3万名联邦雇员被解雇,这是总统声称的大幅削减开支计划的一部分。行业媒体Inside Health Policy援引众议院委员会及工作人员的电话会议内容称,其中约2,900名被解雇的雇员来自美国卫生与人力资源部,约1,200人来自全球最大的生物医学研究资助机构美国国立卫生研究院。该机构管理着近480亿美元的研究资金。NIH还宣布将削减数十亿美元的生物医学研究经费,并在社交媒体上表示,削减“间接”研究成本资助每年可节省40亿美元。
许多被解雇的NIH雇员拥有博士学位和多年专业领域培训经历,他们要么深陷漫长的申诉程序(向政府监察机构质疑解雇合法性),要么因联邦机构暂停招聘而求职无门。即使转向在私营部门就业,许多人也对前景感到悲观。
一位被解雇的NIH生物学家对《财富》杂志表示:“我花了20年才得到这份工作,现在却要思考如何转行。”她正努力争取复职,因此要求匿名。
NIH未回应《财富》杂志的置评请求。
“私营部门根本没有相关职位”
ADP的数据显示,美国私营企业2月新增7.7万个就业岗位,为去年7月以来最小增幅,较上个月各界预期的14.8万几乎腰斩。
随着私营部门就业遇冷,NIH员工对转行缺乏信心。一位在脑机接口研究实验室工作的NIH员工匿名指出,NIH实验室通常围绕首席研究员(PI)的专长量身打造,这意味着公私领域难有完全对口的职位。《财富》杂志知晓该员工身份。
她对《财富》杂志表示:“私营部门根本没有这样的职位。”
政府资助的研究有助于企业的技术发展:例如NIH资助并正在评估Apple Watch检测房颤(中风预警信号)的有效性。但该员工认为,政府资助的研究进展缓慢,私营部门往往没有兴趣进行这类研究。
该员工表示:“实验室不生产产品,而是孕育可能在20年后转化为产品的构想。没有风投会资助这种项目。我们虽不直接产出,但我们的研究成果,应该是私营企业乐于拥有的。”
"资历过高"的困境
那位被解雇的NIH生物学家在2019年入职。她表示,若到高校任职,要么面临资历过高的问题,要么因多年从事相关领域的研究而缺乏跨学科专长。
她表示:“他们不会聘请我担任助理科学家——那是给硕士学历或其他学历拥有者的职位。虽然总监级岗位符合我的经验水平,但他们也不会聘请我担任这类职位,因为我缺乏相关领域的运作经验。”
除了想方设法维持生计的压力外,员工更担忧裁员对科研未来的冲击。这位生物学家指出,实验室团队重建需耗时数年。与她共事的年轻研究生和研究员不仅面临合约终止,更可能因此对在公共机构工作感到厌倦。
上个月因不认同NIH的发展方向而辞职的前NIH执行秘书处主任内特·布劳特表示,政府公共卫生部门的新岗位或具有吸引力的岗位为数不多,正在危及科研未来。裁员后果已然显现,而长期的人员短缺和实验室研究中断将产生持续数十年的连锁反应。
布劳特强调:“NIH的生物医学进步不属于某个政党或国家,也不是只属于美国人。我们的事业将惠及全人类。”
他补充道:“我们正为狭隘的政治博弈赌上整整一代医学专家、研究人员和科学家的未来,这注定会酿成重大灾难。” (财富中文网)
译者:刘进龙
审校:汪皓
• The National Institutes of Health fired about 1,200 workers as part of what President Donald Trump claimed was a cost-cutting effort. Employees who spoke with Fortune said that for fired public-health workers, there are few private-sector options. The work of many scientists is hyper-specific to their labs and can’t be readily applied elsewhere. Others say casting a wider net in a job search would mean applying to positions for which they are overqualified.
As the government purges employees, some federal workers in public health fear they won’t have better luck in the private sector.
Since the beginning of President Trump’s second term, about 30,000 federal employees have been fired as part of what the president argues is a mass cost-cutting effort, Axios reported. Of those employees, about 2,900 were from the Department of Health and Human Resources, according to Inside Health Policy, citing a call with House committees and staffers. About 1,200 are from the National Institutes of Health, the world’s largest public funder of biomedical research, overseeing nearly $48 billion in research. The NIH has also announced billions of dollars in cuts to biomedical research, saying on social media that slashing funding for “indirect” research costs would save it $4 billion annually.
Fired NIH workers, many of whom have a doctoral degree and years of training in specialized fields, are either caught in an appeals process purgatory—petitioning to government watchdogs about the legality of their firings—or are confronted with the weight of the federal hiring freeze. Looking to the private sector for options, some workers aren’t convinced there’s a future there, either.
“I spent 20 years getting this job, and now I’m going to have to figure out how to do something else,” one fired NIH biologist, who wished to remain anonymous as she tries to get her position reinstated, told Fortune.
The NIH did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment.
“This job doesn’t exist in the private sector”
U.S. private employers added 77,000 jobs in February, according to ADP, the smallest gain since July of last year and nearly half of the 148,000 jobs expected last month.
As private-sector job opportunities take a hit, NIH workers aren’t convinced they’d find a job there anyway. NIH labs are often bespoke to their founding principal investigator (PI), meaning there are not one-to-one equivalent positions in the public and private sectors, according to one anonymous NIH employee, working in a lab developing brain-computer interfaces. The employee’s identity is known to Fortune.
“This job doesn’t exist in the private sector,” she told Fortune.
Government-funded research is instrumental to the development of corporate technologies: The NIH funded and is assessing the efficacy of Apple Watch’s ability to detect atrial fibrillation, a stroke warning sign, for example. However, the employee argued the private sector doesn’t have the same appetite for the slow-moving pace of publicly funded research.
“The lab does not create a product,” the employee said. “The lab creates an idea that can be transferred into a product in 20 years. No VC is gonna fund that. We don’t have output in that way, but we create something that the private industry should be happy to have.”
Overqualified for available jobs
The NIH biologist, who was fired and worked for the agency since 2019, said casting a wider net in her job search to look at openings at universities would mean applying to jobs she was either overqualified for or didn’t have expertise in because she spent years pursuing adjacent research.
“They’re not going to hire me as an associate scientist because that’s for people with maybe a master’s degree or something,” she said. “But they’re not going to hire me as a director, which is what my level of experience would lead to, because I don’t know how the field works.”
Beyond trying alternative ways to get a paycheck, workers fear the impact of the purges on the future of research. Rehiring for labs can take years, the biologist said. She worked with young graduate students or fellows who, beyond losing out on contract renewal, could become jaded with the idea of working in public institutions.
The few new or appealing opportunities in government public health endangers the future of scientific research, according to Nate Brought, former director of the NIH’s Office of the Executive Secretariat, who resigned last month because he disagreed with the agency’s direction. The consequences of the firings are already apparent, but prolonged staff shortages and lab disruptions could have decades of repercussions.
“The NIH does not make advancements in biomedical research for Republicans or for Democrats or for Americans,” Brought said. “The entire world benefits from what we do.”
“We are risking an entire generation of medical professionals, researchers, and scientists for petty political bulls–t,” he added. “And it’s a future disaster waiting to happen.”