Over half of biopharma professionals would work again at the companies that let them go, according to a BioSpace LinkedIn poll. Several professionals, as well as recruiting and talent acquisition experts, discuss reasons for—and a key risk of—going back.
Getting laid off can hit people hard, but that wouldn’t stop many biopharma professionals from returning to the employer that pushed them out the door, based on a BioSpace LinkedIn poll. It found that 51% of 1,267 respondents would work again at the company that let them go.
Among those who would return are a marketing professional Pfizer laid off in 2024. The professional, who requested anonymity, shared a practical outlook on the situation with BioSpace, noting that he understands why the company had the workforce reduction.
“It’s business, and I understand how business decisions are made,” he said.
Not only is the marketing professional willing to return to Pfizer, he’s applying now for jobs at the pharma.
“Pfizer treated me very well in terms of my severance and my package that I received,” he said. “So, I hold no grudges. I know there’s great people that work there. I always felt proud to work for Pfizer. So, I would feel equally proud if I went back again.”
Limited Opportunities Drive Some Returns
There are multiple reasons people would work again at companies that laid them off, based on BioSpace interviews with recruiting and talent acquisition experts and biopharma professionals. The job market is a key driver, noted Jane McDonald, founder and principal at Stonehouse Technology Consulting Services, which provides services to the biopharma and healthcare industries.
“I think it has a lot to do with the state of the job market, because people are just really struggling to either get a response or even get an interview or even get a phone screen,” she told BioSpace.
McDonald is among those who would return to a company that laid her off, although she said her decision would depend on why she lost her job. If she was let go due to reasons such as a restructuring or an acquisition, she said, she would go back.
“But,” McDonald added, “my decision to return would be strictly based on my due diligence assessment of that company’s operational health at the time I was asked to go back, because I would want to know if they had improved their internal processes from what was lacking or inefficient.”
Besides the job market, other reasons people are willing to go back to companies after layoffs include having limited opportunities where they live, according to Angie Allen, managing partner for pharma/biotech at Kaye/Bassman, an executive search firm. Allen told BioSpace that in an area that isn’t a big biopharma hub, the former employer might be the big player in town. If the candidate doesn’t want to move, that company could be their best option for getting a job.
Most commonly, Allen sees people who were laid off return to companies as consultants. For example, she shared, one small biopharma let someone go and, two weeks later, asked that person to do consulting half time because they had valuable marketing skills no other employees possessed.
“That is a win-win for everybody, right?” she said regarding becoming a consultant. “It’s something for people to do to be engaged with our space while they’re searching for their next full-time role; company gets the sure thing.”
Whatever the reason biopharma professionals consider working again for employers that laid them off, there can be limits to their willingness to return, as McDonald shared. Larry Algaze, who’s worked for biotechs and is now director of the advisory-CFO services practice at BPM, an accounting and advisory services firm, also has boundaries. He told BioSpace that for him, returning depends on the reason for the company’s jobs cuts. For example, if an employer has a history of recent layoffs, he would avoid going back.
Those Who Return Risk Being Laid Off Again
There’s a notable risk in biopharma professionals returning to companies that let them go: getting laid off again. One person who knows this risk well is Yesica Ontiveros, who most recently was an MSAT technical writer at VGXI, a contract development and manufacturing organization (CDMO).
In December 2023, Ontiveros told BioSpace, the CDMO laid her off from a QA document specialist I position as part of a company restructuring. In 2024, the company asked her to return. She said because she had loved VGXI, her co-workers and her work there as a quality associate, she went back, this time as a QA document specialist II. But in October 2025, just a few months after becoming an MSAT technical writer, the company laid her off again when it stopped operating.
Looking back on what happened, Ontiveros said, “My lesson there was I guess if they did it before, they can do it again.”
If a company lays her off again in the future, she has no plans of going back to work there.
“I just wouldn’t go through that again,” Ontiveros said. “Wouldn’t want to.”
She’s not alone in not wanting an employer to lay her off a second time. Theo Rowley, associate director and talent sourcing business partner at Novartis, told BioSpace, “I know speaking to people that have been rehired at companies, they have always had that hesitancy of if they’ve experienced redundancy before, is it going to happen again?”
Regarding that concern, McDonald described how leadership issues can affect people who return to employers that once let them go.
“If the executive team hasn’t clearly defined a new direction, the company may still be operating under the same short-sighted goals that caused the original instability,” she said. “Without a documented shift in how they manage their technology and talent, the professional risks are facing the same ‘business math’ layoff again within a year or two.”
Due Diligence Is Key Before Going Back
For those considering going back to work at companies that laid them off, Ontiveros recommended making sure the business is in better standing financially than when they were let go. She also noted that it’s safer to return to a large employer with a stable place in the market versus a small biotech, as the latter would have more risk.
For Algaze, one important factor is whether the company has a broad portfolio from a research and development standpoint, meaning it has multiple drugs at various stages of development and commercialization.
“If you’re a one-drug company, and you’re in Phase 2 and they run out of money, the odds are very low that the market’s going to turn around enough where it will be easy to get money to continue funding through Phase 3 and commercialization,” he said.
McDonald recommended that before going back, biopharma professionals do even more due diligence than they did before they were first hired at the company. She also pointed to the risk of “strategic stagnation.”
“If you return to a company that hasn’t overhauled the flawed processes that led to the initial layoffs, you are essentially walking back into a sinking ship,” she said.
