To apply for a job in a commpany with nasty reputation?

[MrsBirdseye]

would you? job would be somewhere on entry level, not really involved in doing anything nasty, but the company isn't exactly respectable in public eye. (not Monsanto, but something that's known for nasty shit)

WingsofNylon Thanks for info.

conscience does not feed your kids or get the Job entre off your back,or stop you being penalised for not job hunting hard enough. I'd rather clean bogs.

* I'd rather clean bogs.*

Have you ever had to?

Yes, I do.

It totally depends!

I've been down and out after multiple redundancies, financial issues etc. I would've worked for anyone for enough money. Cleaning loos didn't pay the mortgage so that wasn't an option

OnionKnight I worked for Atos for 12 years, bloody good company to work for and I would go back in a heartbeat. But I worked in IT not the medical part.

I’ve been in and out of defence most of my life. It’s not for everyone but I actually really loved my work for the most part

Everybody has different perspectives on their red lines and it's nice to be able to make moral choices. But needs must.

It depends on your beliefs I suppose.

Personally, when I was interviewed by the Press for something a few years ago, I absolutely refused to be involved with The S*n or give them an interview. That's because of where I'm from, my family being at Hillsborough and all that kind of stuff. I don't particularly like the Express or Mail, but I didn't refuse them.

On the other hand, in the past I've happily worked with companies like Nestle and BP and their education programs, even though I would personally disagree with other elements of their business.

I think I'd draw a line at companies like Atos though. They exist to cause misery.

I also hate smug people who think they are above others because they have made a particular moral choice. Just another way of virtue signalling and trying to put others down.

Make your choice OP. If the company looks good and you need the job go for it.

Our purchases and consumer behaviour influence company behaviour more than who we work for.

Smug people buying Starbucks coffee and telling me I can "get it on Amazon", wearing clothes made in sweatshops and driving huge gas guzzling cars. Smug people telling you not to work for ABC Corp but insisting that the Dr prescribe this and that treatment for every little complaint regardless of who or what the drug has been tested on. Self-righteous people who "could never work for..." but who happily trash the small hotel/cafe/local shop, ( a local employer, supporting the community) meanwhile supporting the huge chains.

Generally OP people's moral outrage is nothing more than a way of putting you down. Apply, get it, do well, keep to your own moral standards, challenge poor behaviour from within.

I feel really sorry for the animal testers. Any new chemicals that are to be used as drugs (or cosmetics, although that hardly ever happens) need to be tested on either people or animals (usually animals, then people) and while I agree that it shouldn't be done lightly, it seems mental to me that as a society we're OK with people eating meat but people get all weird about giving a few mice and dogs some injections (with local anaesthetic), taking blood samples and then humanely killing them, so that we can develop new asthma medications and chemo and painkillers.

I worked in chemical development in pharma for 10 years so not directly involved in animal testing but still our division head had a bomb put under his car. It makes you wonder why you bothered studying organic chemistry for 7 years to make new life saving drugs if you're going to be at the mercy of crazy animal rights activists and the general public seem to be largely on the side of the activists.

Some people don't have the luxury to not work for companies for 'ethical' reasons.

The guardian comments about the BAE job losses were celebrating because of what the company does. Being from the area of one of the worst affected plants and having family and friends who depend on BAE for survival I found that distasteful.

Ethically I disagree with what BAE does but I don't blame my FIL who works on the shop floor for what happens there.

I feel really sorry for the animal testers. I don't. It's an industry in itself. They're only hiding behind highly emotional causes such as life-saving medicines, while so many just breed, torture, and murder animals just for the sake and profit of it. (i.e. 'research' how animals respond to pain and stress, or test products like cleaning supplies, cosmetics, food additives and... weapons)

The reason I started this thread. Many people I know condemn this company because of their practices. On the other hand, if (let's say, i get a job there) somebody susses me out badmouthing them online. But i'm slightly paranoid.

How would you create medicine safe for human use?

Have you ever been in a cancer research lab? Do you understand how animals are used in research? Nobody is torturing them.

My licence was mild/medium. That meant no undue suffering beyond a certain level. That the norm in uk research

Here’s what the average experiment entailed:

Breeding mouse lines with certain genes either missing a gene or able to be turned off in a specific tissue.
If the turntable off type, given a Single subcutaneous injection of the stuff (non painful, v benign) that ‘turns off’ the gene. If not, no action. Literally breed and watch.

Place mouse in enriched environment with other mice (lone mice are stressed.) allow mouse to bumble around doing nice things for a few months.

Wait x amount of time. Kill mouse humanely. Autopsy it.

I was not allowed to let my mice become visibly ill. Any animal in pain or in suspected pain or discomfort had to be euthanised immediately.

We also fed mice chow enriched with certain foodstuffs to investigate how that interacted with genes in the gut.

I do not recognise the idea of torturing animals, nor would I ever have allowed mine to be hurt or suffer.

There’s a lot of misunderstanding about research.

No one is forcing you to take a job. If it crosses your personal boundaries or you’re afraid then turn it down.

I find the insinuation I’m torturing animals for funsies while hiding behind cancer research pretty offensive.

These days I test on humans. Always looking for volunteers if you’re willing?

Good post above^^. I have at least one family member (a lot of doctors in family) who has had to be involved with animal testing as part of their research. I'm not sure what it actually entailed but I know the family member well enough to know that they are not cruel to animals or humans and definitely wouldn't carry out cruel research 'for funsies'.

There's a difference between understanding animal testing better and accepting that some animal testing is hugely beneficial in terms of improving human health though, and applying for a job at an animal testing company. I certainly don't condemn people who carry out all animal testing. I don't agree with animal testing where it's easily avoidable; there's a lot of info online (possibly dubious some of it) about cosmetics companies etc using animal testing in cruel and unnecessary ways.

Anyway, I don't believe I would choose to do it as a job. Similarly, I think I'd struggle a lot to work in an abattoir, even if it only involved the most humane possible method of killing animals. Not because I'm strongly opposed to the meat and dairy industries, but because I would find slaughter quite traumatic to participate in on a daily basis.

If it was the only job I was qualified for and I didn't have a choice, then of course I'd apply. I'm sure in desperate enough circumstances, I'd do any job, (even if it was illegal, if I was desperate enough).

Anatidae - just posting to say you're a hero. Thank you for what you do.

Absolutely not. This wouldn't sit comfortably with me at all. The thing that gets me out of bed in the morning is working for an organisation that's purpose is to make a difference to people's lives.

I think you'd find somewhere like where you've described wouldn't be a pleasant place to work. If an organisation is unethical externally, the likelihood is it will be unethical internally and the culture will be pretty dire.

Obviously of its a choice between this job and nothing then you need to do what you have to do, but I wouldn't do it if I had a choice.

Definitely nestle

A while back I posted a similar thread (I think I used a namechange) - in my case it was sort of the equivalent of going from a well-respected local newspaper to working for the Daily Mail, in terms of promotion and comparative size and general nastiness of reputation (I'm not a journalist though).

And everyone said no, don't do it, ethics are important and you'll hate yourself if you have to compromise your principles. Guess what? I ignored all that and accepted the job anyway and now I have to compromise my principles on a daily basis and absolutely hate it. The only good thing is the money and even that doesn't justify the fact I'm working for the dark side. I'm looking for a new new job.

The only place I wouldn’t work for would be somewhere promoting and encouraging a pro life stance. And I’d probably try if I was desperate enough, but I’d more than likely be fired sharply due to my views.

I wouldn’t work for nestle, sports direct or atos.

I try and shop ethically so I feel I couldn’t work for someone like that as I would feel I was promoting it.

If its who I'm thinking of ATOS.
I wouldn't. I couldn't have that on my conscience a claimant committing suicide because I had to fail them at their medical, due to orders from the powers that be and their superiors.
Or if its working for a programme provider I wouldn't either, like I said I wouldn't want anything on my conscience that happened due to one of many sanctions I got ordered to dole out.
Also op if you found this leaflet in the job centre I'll take the liberty to assume you're signing on, so you must know what it's like to worry about that brown envelope bouncing through your letter box to tell you you've been sanctioned.
Its a bit sick and twisted to inflict that worry and fear on to others.

Thank you anatidae , I didn't know how to explain what you had said.

I've not worked in a animal lab myself (well, butterflies and drosophila) but lots of friends have, and have always been so so careful with ethics and regulations. They also noted that their mice are kept in such a healthy and clean environment that they are often much healthier than their wild/pet counter parts, apart from whatever issue the research causes. They had had significant training in humane slaughter of the animals they were testing on, to ensure they were not distressed.

If its who I'm thinking of ATOS.
I wouldn't. I couldn't have that on my conscience a claimant committing suicide because I had to fail them at their medical, due to orders from the powers that be and their superiors.
Or if its working for a programme provider I wouldn't either, like I said I wouldn't want anything on my conscience that happened due to one of many sanctions I got ordered to dole out

See, I think that's a bit different for me. I'm assuming that the OP has a general objection to what the company does, rather than the work they would have to do themselves. Yep, I totally accept that it's hypocritical of me, but there's some work I would be unable to do directly, but could work for the company itself in another area if I was desperate enough.

Sorry for the bold fail!