Job market

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
I think you are probably right. I really don't quite understand when rads started going downhill, and where these corporations that buy out rads group come from. Are these radiology groups, or what? And when can we expect the dust to settle?
 
Job market is tight, but not as tight as people describe. Relative to 6 years ago it is very tight, because 6 years ago radiology was the highest field in demand even when compared to primary care fields and that was fake.

Now the job market is bad, but is not really worse than a lot of other specialties. The downhill started because of bad economy, which has resulted in less growth of service utilization, less money in the society as a whole and more important late retirements as many have lost investments in stock market.

At least in my neighborhood which is a desirable coastal city, the job market is bad, though not worse than many other fields. But the expectation of an average radiology resident is higher than any other field. 5 years ago, when I was a junior resident, our fellows could find a well paid job with minimum night shifts in the very middle of this large metropolitan area, and nobody really thought about moving 200 miles away to find a job. Now the scenario is opposite, but the expectations are still there.
 
shark2000 said:
Job market is tight, but not as tight as people describe. Relative to 6 years ago it is very tight, because 6 years ago radiology was the highest field in demand even when compared to primary care fields and that was fake.

Now the job market is bad, but is not really worse than a lot of other specialties. The downhill started because of bad economy, which has resulted in less growth of service utilization, less money in the society as a whole and more important late retirements as many have lost investments in stock market.

At least in my neighborhood which is a desirable coastal city, the job market is bad, though not worse than many other fields. But the expectation of an average radiology resident is higher than any other field. 5 years ago, when I was a junior resident, our fellows could find a well paid job with minimum night shifts in the very middle of this large metropolitan area, and nobody really thought about moving 200 miles away to find a job. Now the scenario is opposite, but the expectations are still there.
Click to expand...

Do you think that things will improve/go back to pre-bad economy times or is that completely unrealistic? I realize that there is a great deal of uncertainty with the SCOTUS decision/obamacare, but I am perplexed as to why residency positions are not decreased if we are training far more rads than are needed.

Weren't spots reduced in both rads and rad onc in the 90's or so when a similar situation occurred with the saturation of the market?
 
Medstudentquest said:
Do you think that things will improve/go back to pre-bad economy times or is that completely unrealistic? I realize that there is a great deal of uncertainty with the SCOTUS decision/obamacare, but I am perplexed as to why residency positions are not decreased if we are training far more rads than are needed.

Weren't spots reduced in both rads and rad onc in the 90's or so when a similar situation occurred with the saturation of the market?
Click to expand...

Nobody knows whether the market improves or not. It is a part of bigger picture: Will US economy improve? Will world economy improve?

How did you come to the conclusion that we have too many Rads than what we need? I know this may be the opinion of many, but it is not really based on any good evidence.
If you decrease the spots from tomorrow you will see the effect on the market starting 10 years from now (after 3-4 years of graduation of the smaller class) and the most effect will be seen 10-20 years from now. Now how many rads do we need 15 years from now??

You seem to be over-obsessed with Rads, one day you ask about future, the other day you ask about job market and then the other day you argue that other fields are also as great as or better than Rads. If you do not like it (that seems to be correct), do not push yourself into doing it. Go for something else.
 
Hi, I am an international student (completed Bachelor of Medicine & Surgery from Bangladesh) and recently got accepted to the MPH (Epidemiology) at Boston University School of Public Health. But I would like to know about the study process of radiology-imaging and their job prospects.

I am interested in radiology or sonography but as the medical degrees usually take long to accomplish, I selected MPH as my safety option so that I can get a job following graduation and if I still like the medical imaging sector, I may go for further degrees. I am also interested in anaesthesiology but the long procedure scares me. Is an MD mandatory in both these degrees? Would anyone please tell me the procedure to start working as a radiologist or sonography specialist or an anaesthesiologist in the USA?
 
yes. you need an MD to practice medicine (radiology and anesthesiology). An MPH has nothing to do with practicing medicine
 
yes. you need an MD to practice medicine (radiology and anesthesiology). An MPH has nothing to do with practicing medicine. You could be an ultrasound or radiology tech if you can't get into med school, and CRNA (nurse anesthetist) if you can't get into med school
 
cowme said:
yes. you need an MD to practice medicine (radiology and anesthesiology). An MPH has nothing to do with practicing medicine. You could be an ultrasound or radiology tech if you can't get into med school, and CRNA (nurse anesthetist) if you can't get into med school
Click to expand...

He has an MBBS so he's already completed medical school. The next step is to take the USMLE's, get ECFMG certification and apply for residency through the match. Matching in rad's or anesthesiology is not likely.
 
shark2000 said:
You seem to be over-obsessed with Rads, one day you ask about future, the other day you ask about job market and then the other day you argue that other fields are also as great as or better than Rads. If you do not like it (that seems to be correct), do not push yourself into doing it. Go for something else.
Click to expand...

I dunno, as a fellow student interested in Rads, I can see where he's coming from. I've wanted to do Rads since high school. Do I absolutely love it? No. Can I see myself doing something else? For sure. But I like it enough that I was willing to do a 5 year residency plus fellowship. Now I'm not so sure and part of that is all of this uncertainty going on right now.

For someone who wants to do radio but isn't one of those "I must do this or I'd die" students, it's a pretty stressful decision.

Just my two cents.
 
dostudent13 said:
I dunno, as a fellow student interested in Rads, I can see where he's coming from. I've wanted to do Rads since high school. Do I absolutely love it? No. Can I see myself doing something else? For sure. But I like it enough that I was willing to do a 5 year residency plus fellowship. Now I'm not so sure and part of that is all of this uncertainty going on right now.

For someone who wants to do radio but isn't one of those "I must do this or I'd die" students, it's a pretty stressful decision.

Just my two cents.
Click to expand...

So let me tell you. What uncertainty?
Yes the job market is tough, but there are 25000-30000 practicing radiologist in the US (or more) who were the second highest paid specialties in the last 2-3 years where we saw the tight market.
We may not be the top 5 highest paid in the future or we may be. But I bet we will be among the higher paid specialists.
When people talk about tight market they mean you may not find your desirable job exactly after fellowship and you may be jobless for half a year or a year or you may need to move. Some choose not to move and do a second fellowship instead.
I bet if you do radiology you can do well financially in a doctors salary scale.
Also there is no guarantee that 10 years from now any other field that have a good job market now will be in demand. Whatever happened in the last 5 years to us can easily happen to other fields.
If you like it, do it. If you don't like it, don't do it.
 
shark2000 said:
So let me tell you. What uncertainty?
Yes the job market is tough, but there are 25000-30000 practicing radiologist in the US (or more) who were the second highest paid specialties in the last 2-3 years where we saw the tight market.
We may not be the top 5 highest paid in the future or we may be. But I bet we will be among the higher paid specialists.
When people talk about tight market they mean you may not find your desirable job exactly after fellowship and you may be jobless for half a year or a year or you may need to move. Some choose not to move and do a second fellowship instead.
I bet if you do radiology you can do well financially in a doctors salary scale.
Also there is no guarantee that 10 years from now any other field that have a good job market now will be in demand. Whatever happened in the last 5 years to us can easily happen to other fields.
If you like it, do it. If you don't like it, don't do it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. You gotta do what you like. Which is why I ultimately decided to go for rays. No matter what I did, I always find myself back in the reading room.
 
shark2000 said:
So let me tell you. What uncertainty?
Yes the job market is tough, but there are 25000-30000 practicing radiologist in the US (or more) who were the second highest paid specialties in the last 2-3 years where we saw the tight market.
We may not be the top 5 highest paid in the future or we may be. But I bet we will be among the higher paid specialists.
When people talk about tight market they mean you may not find your desirable job exactly after fellowship and you may be jobless for half a year or a year or you may need to move. Some choose not to move and do a second fellowship instead.
I bet if you do radiology you can do well financially in a doctors salary scale.
Also there is no guarantee that 10 years from now any other field that have a good job market now will be in demand. Whatever happened in the last 5 years to us can easily happen to other fields.
If you like it, do it. If you don't like it, don't do it.
Click to expand...

Being out of a job for 6 months + is certainly a big problem. And if the job market is so tight, you have to consider "why", and what steps are necessary to correct the situation. If there are no jobs out there, are we training too many rads? Graduating roughly 1200 rads/year, or less than 30 new rads per state if we look at it that way, does not seem like a ton. However, if there are no jobs, you really have to wonder why no job availability exists. Is volume going down? Do residency positions need to be reduced, etc, etc. If jobs really are no where to be found, it doesn't matter how much you like a specialty, because you won't be able to practice.
 
but it's not 30 new rads per state. NYC alone produces ~100 new radiologists a year, and gets applications nationwide, hence the crap market there. You could combine all the residents in North Carolina, Virginia and Georgia and you would be about half that number of graduating rads.
 
cowme said:
but it's not 30 new rads per state. NYC alone produces ~100 new radiologists a year, and gets applications nationwide, hence the crap market there. You could combine all the residents in North Carolina, Virginia and Georgia and you would be about half that number of graduating rads.
Click to expand...

I was just giving an example. And NYC has millions of people with tons of hospitals, so I would assume that a lot more rads are needed in a place like NYC vs. North Dakota, but again, just an example.

So in a city with millions of people, and a large # of hospitals, why are ~ 100 new grads such an outrageous amount? I guess I'm either missing something here or simply don't understand.
 
The east coast in general trains far too many residents, hence the oversaturation of those markets (in more fields than just radiology)

NYC has has 19 Million people and has easily over 100 graduating residents.

Boston has 5 million and graduates around 50

Philly has 6 million people and graduates around 40 residents




contrast that with other areas:

LA has 13 million and graduates <30

Atlanta has 10 million and graduates ~15

Miami, dallas, houston and washington dc each have 6 million people but each train around 15-20 residents.


So you have new york city alone having a similar number of trained residents than LA, Atlanta, miami, dallas, houston, and washington COMBINED (>50 million population vs 19 in NYC).

NYC is also particularly difficult because you get people nationwide wanting to move to new york
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cowme said:
The east coast in general trains far too many residents, hence the oversaturation of those markets (in more fields than just radiology)

NYC has has 19 Million people and has easily over 100 graduating residents.

Boston has 5 million and graduates around 50

Philly has 6 million people and graduates around 40 residents




contrast that with other areas:

LA has 13 million and graduates <30

Atlanta has 10 million and graduates ~15

Miami, dallas, houston and washington dc each have 6 million people but each train around 15-20 residents.


So you have new york city alone having a similar number of trained residents than LA, Atlanta, miami, dallas, houston, and washington COMBINED (>50 million population vs 19 in NYC).

NYC is also particularly difficult because you get people nationwide wanting to move to new york
Click to expand...

I can understand that big metro cities/east coast may train a lot of residents, but I think my point is that the job market saturation is not just in NYC, where many of us have no interest in working. I think the situation is more widespread, and I think that's where the concern is. Clearly, there will be more people who want to work in the city vs. rural North Dakota, and that's understandable. But when the job market overall across the nation, not just in big metro cities, looks bleak, there has to be an analysis of what's happening.
 
East coast (phila-boston-NYC), Chicago, California. I have never heard a resident mention job difficulties anywhere else. If you are connected in any other city in the country, you will find a job there.
 
cowme said:
East coast (phila-boston-NYC), Chicago, California. I have never heard a resident mention job difficulties anywhere else. If you are connected in any other city in the country, you will find a job there.
Click to expand...

Go to any of these cities, and you will still find IM/FP/ped/psych, etc jobs. I posted some of my info on a website to look for some job opportunities until I start residency and without even inquiring, I get called daily and emailed about job opps. in primary care, even in the cities you mentioned. So clearly there isn't a saturation in these fields, even though they train far more residents than rads for example. I have looked at a number of cities that in the future I'd be ok with working in, and a number of them are 1-2 hours away from the major metro cities mentioned, and there is still a scarcity of jobs in rads. That kind of freaks me out, and I wonder whether in general, we are training more residents than are needed.
 
Well, nothing you can do about it. If you like rads enough to move to a city you aren't crazy about, do it. If you would be happier doing peds in the place you wanna be, go do that. But you are over 6 years away so there is no way to predict how rads will look right now
 
cowme said:
Well, nothing you can do about it. If you like rads enough to move to a city you aren't crazy about, do it. If you would be happier doing peds in the place you wanna be, go do that. But you are over 6 years away so there is no way to predict how rads will look right now
Click to expand...

Well not really. If we are training too many people, then that can be fixed. You don't think that it makes sense to look at the situation and say hey, what's happening here? That's what I'm saying. I would never do peds no matter how much it paid, it was simply an example.
 
Why you compare radiology job market to primary care fields?Primary care providers and ER have been always in demand, no matter whom u talk to. Pretty basic and you need them in large scale.
Compare radiology with other specialty fields. Many other specialties do have at least as bad job market at us. Compare it to ophthalmology, ENT, cardiology. I assure you that the job market of IR is better than interventional cards and vascular surgery and the job market of thoracic imaging is better than cardiac imaging trained cardiologists.


And if you want to accept the same income of peds, you can find a job in the very middle of Manhattan.
 
I've been in radiology for many years and the job market is clearly not good. I have friends who are from great US training programs who have been unemployed for more than 6 months. It reminds me of the beginning of those days when there were no jobs in Radiology and radiology residents left radiology programs to do residencies in Internal Medicine. If I were a medical student right now I would choose Primary Care. Even though radiologists who are working still have a good income, trust me, it's not going to last forever. Furthermore, radiology has become increasingly commoditized, with the main focus on high volume (i.e. high stress) with more and more practices functioning like "mills." As far as job security goes, forget it. Unless you're fortunate enough to own a practice or already be a partner, you're more or less at the whim of whoever hires you. Outsourcing of jobs is a big issue too. For example, my local hospital uses a teleradiology company that sends the majority of business overseas, resulting in even fewer jobs. When I was choosing a residency, if I knew my future job could and would be outsourced, I never would have chosen Radiology. Another reason why fields like primary care are a much better option and something I myself am considering.
 
Experienced Rad said:
I've been in radiology for many years and the job market is clearly not good. I have friends who are from great US training programs who have been unemployed for more than 6 months. It reminds me of the beginning of those days when there were no jobs in Radiology and radiology residents left radiology programs to do residencies in Internal Medicine. If I were a medical student right now I would choose Primary Care. Even though radiologists who are working still have a good income, trust me, it's not going to last forever. Furthermore, radiology has become increasingly commoditized, with the main focus on high volume (i.e. high stress) with more and more practices functioning like "mills." As far as job security goes, forget it. Unless you're fortunate enough to own a practice or already be a partner, you're more or less at the whim of whoever hires you. Outsourcing of jobs is a big issue too. For example, my local hospital uses a teleradiology company that sends the majority of business overseas, resulting in even fewer jobs. When I was choosing a residency, if I knew my future job could and would be outsourced, I never would have chosen Radiology. Another reason why fields like primary care are a much better option and something I myself am considering.
Click to expand...

Thanks Chopra 😉
 
I read a thread on aunt minnie stating that the number of training spots increase around 1999 from ~120 to 1000+.If you consider that there was a mismatch between supply and demand through 2005, then each year we are seeing the narrowing of that gap as a result of the increase in training spots.
 
Silent Cool said:
I read a thread on aunt minnie stating that the number of training spots increase around 1999 from ~120 to 1000+.If you consider that there was a mismatch between supply and demand through 2005, then each year we are seeing the narrowing of that gap as a result of the increase in training spots.
Click to expand...

There has not been an increase lately, and I think there was a decrease of around 30 spots from this last match and the previous match. However, it seems that there are not a great deal of jobs out there and while it may be true that aging radiologists may not be retiring due to the recession from 2008, that is also the case for every other specialty and they don't seem to be doing as poorly as rads as far as the job market goes. It is possible that we simply don't need as many rads currently, and that residency spots need to be scaled back. Who accredits programs with # of spots? Are there any talks about reducing the # of positions?
 
Medstudentquest said:
while it may be true that aging radiologists may not be retiring due to the recession from 2008, that is also the case for every other specialty and they don't seem to be doing as poorly as rads as far as the job market goes.
Click to expand...

Not true at all. A radiologist can sit in a chair and dictate films exclusively, especially when they are the senior members of the practice they built. This is a little easier to do when you are 70 years old than it is to do a total hip, or code 15 patients and run around the hospital with arthritic knees.

Rads used to retire earlier than they probably should have before the economy busted. Now they are retiring when they should (or even a little later)
 
cowme said:
Not true at all. A radiologist can sit in a chair and dictate films exclusively, especially when they are the senior members of the practice they built. This is a little easier to do when you are 70 years old than it is to do a total hip, or code 15 patients and run around the hospital with arthritic knees.

Rads used to retire earlier than they probably should have before the economy busted. Now they are retiring when they should (or even a little later)
Click to expand...

I am not sure we agree. The same can be said of rad oncs, derms, gas, psych, etc. So if you think that rads are retiring at the appropriate age, then we must be training too many people if there are no jobs. Clearly something is wrong if the market is so glutted. Either too much supply for the demand, or not enough exit from jobs.
 
Medstudentquest said:
I am not sure we agree. The same can be said of rad oncs, derms, gas, psych, etc. So if you think that rads are retiring at the appropriate age, then we must be training too many people if there are no jobs. Clearly something is wrong if the market is so glutted. Either too much supply for the demand, or not enough exit from jobs.
Click to expand...

you are pretty naive if you think rad oncs and anesthesiologists aren't facing similar job market problems. Yes, derm is in high demand. But it is a very unique specialty that has carved quite the niche. No other specialty should ever compare themselves to dermatology.

Keep in mind that internet forums like auntminnie weren't really around a decade ago. They really tend to over exagerrate any negative thoughts. People are settling for salaries they weren't hoping for when they matched in the field, but they are still getting jobs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
cowme said:
you are pretty naive if you think rad oncs and anesthesiologists aren't facing similar job market problems. Yes, derm is in high demand. But it is a very unique specialty that has carved quite the niche. No other specialty should ever compare themselves to dermatology.
Click to expand...

Do a quick search of anesthesia and rad onc jobs, and you'll find a large number. Radiology has few jobs. My question to you is-why not address the point that there are not that many jobs out there, and that there has to be some underlying cause for that?

What are your thoughts on this? Pathology has a similar situation where they are producing far more grads than they need. Programs have started cutting residency positions. Why are we not doing the same? And the only niche derm has really is seriously limiting the # of their spots, which is creating problems for them bc NP/PAs are moving in. The same anesthesia scenario is happening in derm.

What kind of salaries are the new grads settling for? The few jobs that I have seen offer about the same that they did before. How has that changed?
 
a post on auntminnie recently said that rads was the 18th ranked specialty in terms of jobs, and gas was outside of the top 20, based on a merrit hawkins survey (the largest recruiters). So, it's bad, but it could be worse. The job market troubles seem to really only be an issue in a handful of markets; I don't really know what cutting 100 more residency will do. People will still flock to the those markets and the rural areas will remain in need. But hey, if you need to live somewhere and can't get a job, do a 2nd fellowship.
 
Medstudentquest said:
Do a quick search of anesthesia and rad onc jobs, and you'll find a large number. Radiology has few jobs. My question to you is-why not address the point that there are not that many jobs out there, and that there has to be some underlying cause for that?

What are your thoughts on this? Pathology has a similar situation where they are producing far more grads than they need. Programs have started cutting residency positions. Why are we not doing the same? And the only niche derm has really is seriously limiting the # of their spots, which is creating problems for them bc NP/PAs are moving in. The same anesthesia scenario is happening in derm.

What kind of salaries are the new grads settling for? The few jobs that I have seen offer about the same that they did before. How has that changed?
Click to expand...

As far as I know, pathology is not reducing their spots. Though they have the least popular specialty in terms of % AMGs matched to it, programs still keep their spots open to recruit desperate FMGs, many of whom are incompetent physicians, to do their macroscopic dissections since they are cheaper alternatives to pathology assistants. Upon graduating these programs, the newly minted pathologists are so inexperienced with actual diagnosis that they must do multiple fellowships, both to gain experience and to pass the time until a job opens up.

The overabundance of pathologists has also allowed for the opening of in-office-labs by urologists and gastroenterologists, who bill the technical and professional of the pathologist and pay the path 15-20% at most. Radiology avoids such arrangements due to its relative scarcity, for now.

The field's academic minds trumpet the presence of a shortage of pathologists, but its hard to take them seriously when they have a huge vested interest in maintaining the status quo. I wonder if such conflicts-of-interest exist in the radiology postgraduate training paradigm, explaining the continued expansion of residency positions.

Do any of the members of your academic body own or profit from radiology corporations that employ physicians?
 
cowme said:
a post on auntminnie recently said that rads was the 18th ranked specialty in terms of jobs, and gas was outside of the top 20, based on a merrit hawkins survey (the largest recruiters). So, it's bad, but it could be worse. The job market troubles seem to really only be an issue in a handful of markets; I don't really know what cutting 100 more residency will do. People will still flock to the those markets and the rural areas will remain in need. But hey, if you need to live somewhere and can't get a job, do a 2nd fellowship.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's a handful of markets. NY and LA will always be packed of course, but there is a scarcity of jobs, period. And no, why would I do a second fellowship? I would rather look at the situation and try to resolve the problem. Not sure why there is a continual need to close one's eyes and pretend everything is ok.

You agree that there is an overabundance of radiologists right, causing issues with people finding jobs? Well instead of saying hey everything's cool, how about saying ok whats the best to resolve this situation?
 
Medstudentquest said:
I don't think it's a handful of markets. NY and LA will always be packed of course, but there is a scarcity of jobs, period. And no, why would I do a second fellowship? I would rather look at the situation and try to resolve the problem. Not sure why there is a continual need to close one's eyes and pretend everything is ok.

You agree that there is an overabundance of radiologists right, causing issues with people finding jobs? Well instead of saying hey everything's cool, how about saying ok whats the best to resolve this situation?
Click to expand...

1- First of all I do not know you level of training, but at least in my program which is a big academic center in a coastal city, out of more than 20 fellows all but one found a job. So Still I do not know how you came to the conclusion that there is over-abundance of radiologist?

2- You are over-obsessed with second fellowship. Does this happen? yes. Is it common ? not really. There are very few who does that because they want to stay in a specific geographic location and rather than moving 3000 miles away, they stay for another year in LA or NY or Chicago, do a fellowship and find a job there. Because you are clearly not a radiology resident or fellow, FYI, radiology fellows work 4 days a week, no night calls, and in many places they do internal moonlighting and with their fellowship salary they can clear 100K. So rather than moving, many choose to work 4 days a week on 100K in San Francisco.

3- It seems that you do not want to understand the dynamics of job market in each specialty and repeat you BS over and over again.
If you think the job market for Derm is good, you are really naive. It is horrible.
8 years ago GI doctors were begging for a job. Now GI doctors have a good job market. GI society did not change the number of their trainees at that time.
Cardiology did not change the number of their trainee between years 2000-2003 even though they had a very good job market at that time. Now their job market is worse than us.

From reading your posts, it is obvious that you do not like radiology and you just entered it or like to enter it for good job market or ... I would recommend you the switch out and go for a field with high demand like hospitalist or urology.

I've already found my desirable job in a desirable location. However, personally I think that I will be doing it at least the next 30 years. I really don't mind doing a second fellowship or be out of work for 6 month (though it didn't happen to me and most others) and even-though it beats any medical or surgical field any minute.
Now if this is a diaster for you and you can not handle it, don't do it. Do something else. Just my experience: Don't be sure if you do Derm you will find your desirable job right out of residency or don't be sure by the time you finish derm residency its job market will be good and will not have to do 2 fellowships.
 
Shark, cowme.. how much does doing this second fellowship boost your chances in landing a job in that desired market? Is it the fact that you are now proficient in more subspecialties and hence more competitive, or the fact that you get more time to make connections / wait for positions to open up?
 
Asp said:
Shark, cowme.. how much does doing this second fellowship boost your chances in landing a job in that desired market? Is it the fact that you are now proficient in more subspecialties and hence more competitive, or the fact that you get more time to make connections / wait for positions to open up?
Click to expand...

All fellows in my class which is in a very desirable location, found job with only one fellowship. One found a job that starts in 6 months.

Regarding second fellowship, It is a combination of everything that second fellowship helps. For example a group will tell you that they have an opening next year for MSK, so you go and do an MSK fellowship and get the job. Or you finish fellowship and you do not have a job, now what? you start the second fellowship, do some moonlighting for the groups in town during your fellowship and one of them offer you job. This is esp true if you are new to a city. Being in town for 2 years for any reason increases your odds of finding a job by more than 2 times per se, than being in town for one year.

To my experience, doing 2nd fellowship is not uncommon but not as common as people say. Job market is bad, but not as bad as people say. There are a lot of problems but not as many as people say, . .. . ......
 
shark2000 said:
1- First of all I do not know you level of training, but at least in my program which is a big academic center in a coastal city, out of more than 20 fellows all but one found a job. So Still I do not know how you came to the conclusion that there is over-abundance of radiologist?

2- You are over-obsessed with second fellowship. Does this happen? yes. Is it common ? not really. There are very few who does that because they want to stay in a specific geographic location and rather than moving 3000 miles away, they stay for another year in LA or NY or Chicago, do a fellowship and find a job there. Because you are clearly not a radiology resident or fellow, FYI, radiology fellows work 4 days a week, no night calls, and in many places they do internal moonlighting and with their fellowship salary they can clear 100K. So rather than moving, many choose to work 4 days a week on 100K in San Francisco.

3- It seems that you do not want to understand the dynamics of job market in each specialty and repeat you BS over and over again.
If you think the job market for Derm is good, you are really naive. It is horrible.
8 years ago GI doctors were begging for a job. Now GI doctors have a good job market. GI society did not change the number of their trainees at that time.
Cardiology did not change the number of their trainee between years 2000-2003 even though they had a very good job market at that time. Now their job market is worse than us.

From reading your posts, it is obvious that you do not like radiology and you just entered it or like to enter it for good job market or ... I would recommend you the switch out and go for a field with high demand like hospitalist or urology.

I've already found my desirable job in a desirable location. However, personally I think that I will be doing it at least the next 30 years. I really don't mind doing a second fellowship or be out of work for 6 month (though it didn't happen to me and most others) and even-though it beats any medical or surgical field any minute.
Now if this is a diaster for you and you can not handle it, don't do it. Do something else. Just my experience: Don't be sure if you do Derm you will find your desirable job right out of residency or don't be sure by the time you finish derm residency its job market will be good and will not have to do 2 fellowships.
Click to expand...

1-The assertion that there is an overabundance of rads is not "my" assertion, is a common assertion based on a sluggish market and lack of jobs.
2-I have only mentioned a second fellowship once, based on the suggestion that if I can't find a job I should do one.
3-I certainly think I do understand job dynamics, but I also think that it's important to look at issues present
4-Few if any people do fellowships in derm, much less 2, but that's not the point. As cowme said, derm is a very special type of specialty and others should not compare to it, and I agree with him.
 
shark2000 said:
All fellows in my class which is in a very desirable location, found job with only one fellowship. One found a job that starts in 6 months.

Regarding second fellowship, It is a combination of everything that second fellowship helps. For example a group will tell you that they have an opening next year for MSK, so you go and do an MSK fellowship and get the job. Or you finish fellowship and you do not have a job, now what? you start the second fellowship, do some moonlighting for the groups in town during your fellowship and one of them offer you job. This is esp true if you are new to a city. Being in town for 2 years for any reason increases your odds of finding a job by more than 2 times per se, than being in town for one year.

To my experience, doing 2nd fellowship is not uncommon but not as common as people say. Job market is bad, but not as bad as people say. There are a lot of problems but not as many as people say, . .. . ......
Click to expand...

Tell me this since you bring it up-what does it say about the job market that *some* people are needing to do 2 fellowships? In the past, no fellowship was needed, then 1 was necessary, and now 2 for some. Dont you think that if the market was healthy, that wouldn't be necessary?
Also from what I've seen, salaries have dropped quite a bit it seems. That's also concerning, don't you think? From 300/350 to low 200's at a number of places. What does that say about the market?
 
out of curiosity, where are you getting all these numbers and job data from? I would hope its not all from chosen1 rants
 
cowme said:
out of curiosity, where are you getting all these numbers and job data from? I would hope its not all from chosen1 rants
Click to expand...

🙂 No, not at all. Whoever "chosen1" is, he/she seems absolutely nuts. I have done a significant amount of research on this, read opinions from experts, read about groups being bought out, have looked at CMS fee cut proposals (regarding salaries), and have done a serious job search where I'm at (not the middle of Manhattan or LA), and across the country as well, and when I compare the # of listings for rads vs. other specialties, it is scary. Thats what I'm going off of. I look at other specialist job ads, and see that while obviously the # of jobs are far less for specialists vs. IM/FM for example, there are particularly scare in rads, and that concerns me. 🙁 I agree with you and others who have said that people tend to exaggerate things, sure, but there is no denying that the market is sluggish, and that hiding our heads in the sand is not going to help.

You seem like a reasonable person cowme. Do you think that everything is hunky dory in the job market for us? Are you not at all concerned about groups losing contracts, the continuous wage cutting, the crappy # of jobs, etc?
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't know. I'm a one week old R1. But nobody in my program is doing a second fellowship (except one who is on the 4 year non-traditional FMG track which requires multiple fellowships). And nobody is flipping out about the job market. I am a bit uneasy about the future, but there is nothing I can do about it at this point, so I'll just deal with it when the time comes.

Just to add another tidbit from yesterdays discussion, CMS has proposed a 15-20% reimbursement cut to radiation oncologists (although also proposed another, much smaller, cut to rads also). So, the grass is getting less green everywhere...
 
cowme said:
I honestly don't know. I'm a one week old R1. But nobody in my program is doing a second fellowship (except one who is on the 4 year non-traditional FMG track which requires multiple fellowships). And nobody is flipping out about the job market. I am a bit uneasy about the future, but there is nothing I can do about it at this point, so I'll just deal with it when the time comes.

Just to add another tidbit from yesterdays discussion, CMS has proposed a 15-20% reimbursement cut to radiation oncologists (although also proposed another, much smaller, cut to rads also). So, the grass is getting less green everywhere...
Click to expand...

Yes, I did see the potential cuts to rad oncs and totally felt for my rad onc buddies. I think that's awful.
 
Primary care is MUCH harder to outsource than Radiology. Radiology studies are being sent overseas to be read, that's a fact. If the trend increases there will be more competition which will drive down salaries and/or decrease the number of US radiology jobs.

I challenge anyone to argue with that logic.
 
Experienced Rad said:
Primary care is MUCH harder to outsource than Radiology. Radiology studies are being sent overseas to be read, that's a fact. If the trend increases there will be more competition which will drive down salaries and/or decrease the number of US radiology jobs.

I challenge anyone to argue with that logic.
Click to expand...

That is a wild misinterpretation of the truth. Radiology studies are sent overseas rarely, and when they are, they are read by US-TRAINED rads who chose to work overseas (it is illegal for a foreign doc to read a film on a US patient). And when they do read from abroad, they can only give a preliminary report, rather than an official study--which must be done in the US.

Meanwhile, PCPs have outsourced their work to NURSES. Nothing drives down salaries like showing the world that a mid level can do your job.
 
cowme said:
That is a wild misinterpretation of the truth. Radiology studies are sent overseas rarely, and when they are, they are read by US-TRAINED rads who chose to work overseas (it is illegal for a foreign doc to read a film on a US patient). And when they do read from abroad, they can only give a preliminary report, rather than an official study--which must be done in the US.

Meanwhile, PCPs have outsourced their work to NURSES. Nothing drives down salaries like showing the world that a mid level can do your job.
Click to expand...

It's hard to know what the future will bring, I'm not particularly worried about the outsourcing issue. I am worried about the cuts and job scarcity though. I see lots of cuts with bundling of payments. It doesnt seem like it makes sense for many students to go into rads based on a financial basis anymore. Do you disagree?
 
Experienced Rad said:
Primary care is MUCH harder to outsource than Radiology. Radiology studies are being sent overseas to be read, that's a fact. If the trend increases there will be more competition which will drive down salaries and/or decrease the number of US radiology jobs.

I challenge anyone to argue with that logic.
Click to expand...

I was about to say it, but cowme said it first. Primary care is now the domain of nurses.

Radiology needs to stay competitive and well-paid to draw the best minds to it. Otherwise it will end up like pathology: intellectually stagnant and bereft of technological advancement.

Over in the pathology forums they're having trouble with the job market to the point where one of the recent job offers is for 110k a year. Insulting. Anyway, they really screwed the pooch by taking too many FMGs and saturating the market. Rads should not do this or they can expect to see the same numbers.
 
Substance said:
I was about to say it, but cowme said it first. Primary care is now the domain of nurses.

Radiology needs to stay competitive and well-paid to draw the best minds to it. Otherwise it will end up like pathology: intellectually stagnant and bereft of technological advancement.

Over in the pathology forums they're having trouble with the job market to the point where one of the recent job offers is for 110k a year. Insulting. Anyway, they really screwed the pooch by taking too many FMGs and saturating the market. Rads should not do this or they can expect to see the same numbers.
Click to expand...

What specialty are you in substance? You said you are from Canada too right? Do you practice there I take it? I totally agree with you, and kind of what I've been saying. The market is totally saturated. Yet no one is doing anything about it. We should probably half the # of residency positions to start with. And who wants to do a 6 year residency to get paid less than primary care/nursing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Taurus
Radiology has hottest job market in medicine?
Replies
31
Views
11K
Baller27
Baller27
W
Job offer 800k starting
Replies
33
Views
6K
jambro
jambro
M
Job Search Advice
Replies
8
Views
2K
Olddogdoc
O
C
NYC IR job market
Replies
2
Views
2K
qxrt
qxrt
C
Breast Imaging Fellowship - future job market, compensation and demand?
Replies
7
Views
5K
Cognovi
Cognovi
Top