Science and math are as unemployable as the humanities. When people use "STEM" in this way they really only mean engineering.
I find it a lot easier to develop a Math/Physics graduate's coding skills than a CS graduate's underlying understanding of the physical world and formulaic thinking.
But genetic research is more of a CS-dominated field than it is a purely "scientific" field these days. nVidia pays technical geneticists mid-six figures to work on their projects.
Science is becoming more democratized and breaking out of the academic, federally-funded, very slow process model, and plenty of people are working in private science that have nothing to do with making drugs, but rather in brand new fields and exploding existing niche ones.
Some of this isn't great, I'll be the first to admit with a lot of experience on both sides of the aisle. But overall it's a massive net positive. For everyone.
The value of a classical education is that the student learns critical thinking and problem solving in a diverse set of frameworks, which allows them to adapt to the requirements of the job.
Sociology curricula are getting quite quantitative these days — the jump from sociology student to data scientist isn’t that far. I used to live with a bunch of sociologists back in grad school, and they lived and breathed R, Python, and SAS.
I have a physics degree, and while I'm not employed as a programmer per se, programming is my main problem solving tool. It wouldn't be a quantum leap for me to move into a programming job if I wanted to do it.
On the other hand, I also have two friends whose college degrees were in philosophy and music performance, and both became programmers.
Do employers in some parts really salivate over green math/phys grads with not so much as a github profile? Or do these anecdata leave off some key arc to the story where the grad does something substantial to bridge the gap between said major and software dev?