If you read only one review, make it this one: opiniones de empleados con el puesto de Research Scientist en Lawrence Berkeley Lab

Oh my, this is where it gets interesting. I have risen to a mid-career level, involved in group and division leadership. And in so doing, I have peeked behind the curtain on how this place runs. And it's terrifying. At a fundamental level, the administrative, bureaucratic, and managerial functions of this Lab are mediocre to abysmal. You don't really see this as a junior employee, but from mid-career onward, as you interact with procurement, HR, payroll, travel, area/Laboratory management, the office of the CFO, counsel, facilities, etc. you come to realize how incredibly inefficient and poorly performing this place is. Great strain is needed to push through even the most basic administrative items. Things regularly fall through the cracks or are incorrectly executed, requiring your constant attention to make sure things are done correctly. There are countless roadblocks to simple requests, and Byzantine rules for every procedure. Every one of these services seems dedicated to not doing its job. And project accounts are charged through the roof for this bottom-barrel service with exceedingly high overhead rates. Clearly, all of the tech companies in the area are attracting the best administrative talent away from the Lab. This place seems to foster a demoralizing culture, which is baffling to me. Work can already be stressful, due to the majority of Lab funding coming from the Federal government and thus subject to the politics of the day. This can place great variability on funding, resulting in substantial uncertainty about future work. But we all accept this because we love the work we do. However, on top of this, there are often petty internal political fights regarding project leadership, support for pet projects, internal funding allocation, funding coverage for specific personnel, etc. This territorial infighting is sad to witness, and often entrenches established and older PIs at the cost of mid-career folks looking for professional development. Reclassifications/promotions and performance evaluations make me want to pull my hair out. The Lab uses an arcane and archaic system that regularly demoralizes a significant percentage of the workforce with no real benefit. It rewards classic academic publishing but fails to recognize societal impact resulting from the work. There is an oppressive top-down management control over everything, often ignoring or bypassing the recommendations from mid-level supervisors. As a result of all the above, this place is incredibly toxic to junior and mid-career folks, while protective of established senior and management personnel. Mediocrity and the status quo are rewarded. It is no surprise that in my division/area, there have been dozens of promising rising stars that have bailed on the Lab. All are now very successful in their new positions in other organizations, and it's a shame the Lab's culture pushed them away. For anyone contemplating working at the Lab, I have the following advice: (1) If you are early in your career (particularly students, postdocs, research associates, etc.), this place can provide great experience working on exciting projects with great people. But have an exit plan to leave in 3-5 years. The Lab is a great stepping stone (looks good on a resume), which will enable you to find other great opportunities. (2) If you are senior in your field, the Lab is probably trying to recruit you to a leadership position. Honestly, I don't know much about life as a senior employee, but it appears to be pretty good. If you can handle the administrative and bureaucratic mediocrity, that is. (3) If you are mid-career (late postdoc, early research scientist, etc.), I would run away from this place. As fast as you can. Professional development is practically non-existent for you here. The administrative and bureaucratic quagmires will suck so much of your time and drain your soul. It's not worth it.