Pathology compensation increases were larger than cost of living increases

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

BU Pathology

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Sep 10, 2006
Messages
642
Reaction score
47
It has been stated that there is an oversupply of pathologists and standard supply and demand principles would stipulate a corresponding reduction in price, i.e. compensation would drop. This is a testable hypothesis, specifically whether there has been a decline in the starting compensation of newly hired pathologists.

To test this hypothesis the analysis looked at the compensation of new Assistant Professors of Pathology. More specifically, the compensation at the 25th percentile from 1999 to 2013 was used, since new Assistant Professors would most likely be recruited at that level. The compensation survey was from the American Association of Medical Colleges. This survey draws data directly from the medical schools payroll, so the data are not self-reported salaries.
Data 1.jpg



The compensation in 1999 was set at 100, and subsequent increases in compensation were related to the starting compensation in 1999, shown in the graph. Stated another way, if an Assistant Professor of Pathology was hired in 1999 at a salary of $100, then in 2003 the starting salary of a newly recruited Assistant Professor would be $120.


Since 1999 there have been increases in the cost of living, so just looking at starting salaries would not tell the complete story. The social security cost of living allowance (COLA) is also presented, the COLA data were obtained from this website:
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/news/cola/automatic-cola.htm

The graph clearly demonstrates that the starting salaries of new Assistant Professors of Pathology has increased more than the COLA.

Additionally, Medscape just reported the average increase in physicians salary for 2014. More than 500 pathologists reported an average increase in salary of 12%.


Daniel Remick, M.D.
Chair and Professor of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
Boston University School of Medicine, Boston Medical Center

Members don't see this ad.
 
To test this hypothesis the analysis looked at the compensation of new Assistant Professors of Pathology

What analysis are you referring to?

More specifically, the compensation at the 25th percentile from 1999 to 2013 was used, since new Assistant Professors would most likely be recruited at that level
How does this study take into account all the institutions that recruit new academics at the "Instructor level" and pay them very low salaries?

Additionally, Medscape just reported the average increase in physicians salary for 2014. More than 500 pathologists reported an average increase in salary of 12%.
Yes, and the "Medscape Physician Compensation Report 2014" showed that pathologists' income decreased by 3%.
www.medscape.com/features/slideshow/compensation/2014/public/overview
 
Last edited:
I know very few people who aspire to be an "assistant professor". I know many people who aspire to be "partner".
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Having recently left academics I can say I did experience a lot of these issues on salaries and other aspects of the academic market first-hand. I think all on here are correct on some level. I did see salaries increase over the last 5-10 years for Asst. Prof. positions, especially in certain regions of the country. I also saw:
1. The number of available positions go down dramatically, especially in tenure-track,
2. The % on-service time dramatically increase, even for those with specified % built into their contracts,
3. Research component/ protected time/start up funds almost disappear from many institutions,
4. The utility of "instructor" level become prevalent and people kept at that position beyond what was required in the past.

What does it all mean? We are still trying to figure it out. As stated many times I think it is a land of the haves and have-nots. I personally did get several offers but was in the former category.
 
The number of new positions offered for assistant professors has gone down over the past decade.
 
Academics is a peculiar field. I'm the only one of my graduating year to not do academics and its interesting to see the difference. Tenure track is all but gone and those who have tenure are just riding the wave until its gone forever. The days of tenure track full professors earning $250K+ doing 5 hours of sign-out/week are going to be talked about in the same context as night-time fairy-tales.

Unless you are ridiculously successful at securing extramural funding, most of the positions currently available are service/teaching based. Hiring departments will tell you that research is "desired" but not "required" to advance in your career there...but then they'll turn around and say that you haven't authored anything that merits promotion to associate professor or higher. Also, good luck trying to author something worth publishing in a mid to high impact journal as promotion currency while working 10-12 hours/day earning the revenue that is being sucked up by the senior faculty. Even more astonishing are the instructorships, even assistant instructorships, that are cropping up paying ~$10-15K better than a PGY-5/6 position. Considering what you put into the field given the other specialty options (not to mention the immense effort required to even get such a position), that is insulting quite honestly.

All that being said, over the course of my training I saw my faculty's salaries rise across the board consistently. They are still no where near what private practice earns, but its better that what it was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Even the title of this thread is misleading. It's the kind of thing a politician would say, Dr. Remick. You're picking a very small subset, pointing out their avery salary has increased above COLA, and extrapolate to all pathologists. With due respect, that's bunk, and you know it or should know it. I continue to give you props for posting on here with your real name and title, but the claim you're making here is far exaggerated.

I think back to my residency program, and struggle to think of American faculty members under 40. That is, most of the young faculty were foreign. A few Americans joined right out of training, and soon left for greener pastures. I personally think academic pathology is a crappy deal, and imagine that mindset is shared by many other young pathologists who have six figures worth of debt.
 
Even the title of this thread is misleading. It's the kind of thing a politician would say.... You're picking a very small subset, pointing out their avery salary has increased above COLA, and extrapolate to all pathologists.

THIS.

Unfortunately, a lot of my colleagues are towing this line.
 
Even the title of this thread is misleading. It's the kind of thing a politician would say, Dr. Remick. You're picking a very small subset, pointing out their avery salary has increased above COLA, and extrapolate to all pathologists. With due respect, that's bunk, and you know it or should know it. I continue to give you props for posting on here with your real name and title, but the claim you're making here is far exaggerated.

I think back to my residency program, and struggle to think of American faculty members under 40. That is, most of the young faculty were foreign. A few Americans joined right out of training, and soon left for greener pastures. I personally think academic pathology is a crappy deal, and imagine that mindset is shared by many other young pathologists who have six figures worth of debt.

My colleagues that stayed academic after residency/fellowship were making almost exactly half of what I made starting in private practice. That's not even accounting for the fact that I'm on partner track now, so the difference has gotten even wider. And it seemed like they had more responsibilities including teaching, publishing, on call, etc. I don't know where all the money goes in academia, but based on how our group practice is paid I can't for the life of me figure out why everyone makes so little.
 
I think the data subset suggests something else is going on. This shows a 70% increase over 13 years. I don't think it is anyway emblematic of the jobs market for most pathologists.
 
The pathology job market is the "instructor position". After doing a couple of fellowships and still can't find work. Academics throws that at you....work like an attending get paid like a glorified resident. Seems to be a growing position....so maybe the job market is getting better. haha.
 
The cost of a pack of cigarettes has risen much more in the last decade. The tobacco industry must be booming compared to how it was in the 1970's!

(Lets keep government subsidized academic pathologists who are nearly entirely insulated from free market forces away from interpreting and extrapolating market data)
 
Hiring departments will tell you that research is "desired" but not "required" to advance in your career there...but then they'll turn around and say that you haven't authored anything that merits promotion to associate professor or higher. Also, good luck trying to author something worth publishing in a mid to high impact journal as promotion currency while working 10-12 hours/day earning the revenue that is being sucked up by the senior faculty. Even more astonishing are the instructorships, even assistant instructorships, that are cropping up paying ~$10-15K better than a PGY-5/6 position.

Truth.
 
The pathology job market is the "instructor position". After doing a couple of fellowships and still can't find work. Academics throws that at you....work like an attending get paid like a glorified resident. Seems to be a growing position....so maybe the job market is getting better. haha.

The "Instructor" position in itself is not bad. The point is to allow Jr. faculty the time and flexibility to establish themselves scientifically without the burden of a heavy clinical work load. Because you are not providing much (or any) clinical work, you benefit from the institution with a relatively good salary while you get established. The goal is to stay in this position until you feel ready to have the academic clock start ticking.

However, at many institutions it seems this position is being filled by people doing entirely or mostly clinical work... I can see the utility as a placeholder for grads who just need to stick around for another year for personal reasons or while they find a job... but if people are being hired to sign out cases as a permanent position then I would see that as abuse.

Also, it becomes a problem if a scientifically-oriented faculty member IS ready to start the clock but cannot advance because there is no room or money for another position at the Asst. Prof. level.
 
The graph clearly demonstrates that the starting salaries of new Assistant Professors of Pathology has increased more than the COLA.

Additionally, Medscape just reported the average increase in physicians salary for 2014. More than 500 pathologists reported an average increase in salary of 12%.

I can't say I don't believe them but I don't see how that is possible after the slashing of 88305/88112 in 2013 and 88342 in 2014 by CMS. It is common for private insurance contracts to be tied to CMS reimbursment, so I just don't see how anyone could have made an extra 12% without a signing out a lot more cases than they did in 2013.
 
Top