Sundae posted:

Are you okay with medium pharma, or do you want the specific "big pharma" pharma? If you're dead set on "big pharma" pharma, you're in for some problems. They're all basically imploding right now under the weight of the collective poo poo that has accumulated at the top of their management structures. Boner pills only go so far, and most of them forgot that you need to actually make drugs to sustain your company.

Stay the hell away from Merck and Pfizer right now, and probably Vertex as well. J&J is too fragmented for me to comment on, given they're basically a conglomerate of a bazillion smaller companies. Some are stable, some aren't. Roche is bad with the exception of Genentech. I'm told that even after being bought out, Genentech is still basically bio-Mecca. Novartis is hit or miss, but more stable than most. Lily is hiring as well. Based on some people I talked to at a conference last year, stay away from Teva for a bit. No idea on BMS, and stay away from Amgen like it has the plague.

Despite so much of big pharma being in the United States, I'd actually suggest checking elsewhere first. The USA has a boatload of social and political problems right now, and on top of that, big pharma's implosion over here has swamped the market with experienced scientists who are out of work. For example, my company's fired about 40,000 scientists so far, and another 30,000 or so to go in the coming two years. Most of the other big companies are doing similar things, though probably not at quite the scale of my place. We're hosed in a very special sort of way. Great resume / grades coming out of school or not, you can't compete with someone who has been in the field for 15 years.

If you're open to medium pharma, Cubist in Massachusetts, USA is a very nice company to work for. A lot of former PFE employees all ended up there, and I hear wonderful things about the place from them. They love it.