Pros
BioReliance are very useful for gaining GMP experience. Their systems are woefully outdated but it's still something worth having on your CV. Secondly, they have been acquired by Merck. So things have the potential to improve, but unless you here from other reviewers (after June 2017) that there has been an overhaul of middle managers, don't get your hopes up.
Cons
I worked for BioReliance for approx. 2.5 years, I started my career as an Associate Scientist and left the company as an Associate Scientist II. Over the 2.5 year span I participated in several of cross-functional teams in all three sites of BioReliance, this gave me the opportunity to work closely with many of the Operations directors, managers and team members, so before I delve into the problems at BioReliance, I’d like to clarify that this review refers ONLY to the Glasgow site. From my experience, the Pentlands and Stirling sites were well managed and appeared much more positive than the Glasgow site. I’ve broken the issues down to several areas which I believe need addressed at BioReliance Glasgow. SALARY – Simply put the salaries at BioReliance are not competitive and the increases are not good. I left the company for a similar role in another company for a 45% salary increase. CULTURE – BioReliance Glasgow operates with a blame culture, as with any company (particularly one with such a high turnover), mistakes happen. However, at BioReliance the first priority is to blame the most junior member of staff and often to publicly shame this person. HOLIDAYS – The situation surrounding holidays for lab staff in BioReliance is absurd. I have had holiday requests declined months in advance because “we might be busy”. Several of my colleagues were declined holidays because team members in completely different functional groups also had a holiday booked that day. Supervisors and management take holidays at any given time, but lab staff are expected to work overtime and have their own holidays dictated by the convenience of the company. TRAINING – There are no training plans at BioReliance. You are trained very quickly in one assay (because the previous person has left) and you are expected to perform that assay every day for years. Until, that is, you threaten to leave. At which point they will train you in a second assay…this pattern continues. You are not trained for your personal development, you are not trained due to interest. PROGRESSION – The issue with the progression at BioReliance is not that is does not exist, but the extreme lengths needed to gain promotion. Managers continually impress that you are “close to promotion” or “being considered” but this is not the case. After 18 months at the company I had worked to ensure that I ‘ticked off’ every aspect of the senior associate scientist job description. Despite this, I was not given the promotion and tld I “just missed”, I was encouraged to work harder. After 2 years at the company I was the most highly qualified, most accomplished and most trained member of lab staff within my team. I was declined the promotion a final time, given the reason that I was not emotionally mature enough. My experience is not uncommon, many of my ex-colleagues have left for the same reason. Lab staff are pitted against each other to compete for promotions which do not exist, it creates an incredibly negative environment and drives a wedge of hostility among teams. WORKLOAD – Workload is poorly managed, with some members of staff doing 4 times the work of others. Skipping lunch and working late is commonplace. Stress related absence is rife throughout the lower tiers of staff. SUPERVISORS – Put simply (most) supervisors are unsuited for their positions. In some cases supervisors are less qualified or accomplished that the scientists they supervise, but have progressed to that position through years spent at the company (which includes years spent on maternity leave). In my experience, supervisors were indecisive, undiplomatic and lazy. During my time at BioReliance I worked alongside one very good supervisor, but he has since left the company. MANAGEMENT – There is huge variety within the management at BioReliance. The UK site head (at the time I left) was very capable, with very good aims for the company. However, all attempts to change from this negative spiral in the Glasgow site die at the middle management level. Initiatives are in place. Huge amounts of resource are invested into improving things, but these are all blocked at the middle management level, particularly in the Molecular Biology, Virology and Microbiology departments.
