Academic salaries

[WNT Signaling]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I am confused and trying to get an idea of what the average salaries are in academic path. The AAMC academic medicine report for 2008-09 lists the average entry path salary as $173,000 (25/75 154/203), and the mid-to-late career average as $234,000 (25/75 201/284), but the numbers floated around in previous SDN posts seem to be much lower. I realize that UCSF/MGH will probably pay less than a less prestigious institution, as well as the fact that a dermopath will probably make more than someone specializing in blood banking, but in general, to those of you who have gone through the job process, do the AAMC numbers seem legitimate?

Also, the numbers people have stated in previous posts seem to suggest that PP paths make less than family practitioners. Is this really true? I am aware that a path in a saturated market will make less than one in the rural Midwest, but even in saturated markets, are path salaries lower than FP?

Thanks

 

[yaah]

Those numbers are probably pretty accurate if you include all benefits added in (as opposed to just straight salary). Academic programs often have fairly sizeable benefits in terms of retirement plan matching funds, health care, CME funds, things like that.

I do not know what family practitioners make in private practice but I do not think it is more than pathologists. I would be quite surprised if that was true.

 

[scurred]

starting salaries at our academic institution is 180k, 5 years in around 250k, vice chairman around 350k, chairman around 500k

 

[Cleavername]

starting salaries at our academic institution is 180k, 5 years in around 250k, vice chairman around 350k, chairman around 500k

damn, thats pretty damn good lol. its in salt lake city? are those 180 a year entry level jobs?

 

[2121115]

starting salaries at our academic institution is 180k, 5 years in around 250k, vice chairman around 350k, chairman around 500k

That would be extremely rare for an academic institution to start a new graduate assistant prof at 180K of salary and even more extremely rare to be making 250K of salary in 5 years. That is salary deposited into bank account every month (not benefits etc).

 

[WNT Signaling]

That would be extremely rare for an academic institution to start a new graduate assistant prof at 180K of salary and even more extremely rare to be making 250K of salary in 5 years. That is salary deposited into bank account every month (not benefits etc).

In your experience, what do you think a more commone number is for new faculty and for >5 year faculty? Thanks!

 

[BU Pathology]

Pathologists salary


The peer reviewed literature is almost always a more authoratative source than an internet discussion forum, and you are encouraged to use that.

To answer the question about what is a typical starting salary, a JAMA analysis of academic physicians shows that in 1999 a pathologist’s salary at the 20th percentile was $110,000, the median salary was $139,000 and the 80th percentile was $183,000. This information can be found in Pubmed, PMID 10974694. The 20th percentile salary would be the approximate salary for a new assistant professor.

They data are 10 years old, and should be adjusted for inflation. Also, these are academic salaries. Private practice will almost always be higher. More recent information will be found in the AAMC annual salary survey which most medical schools have in the library.

You should note that radiologists and anesthesiologists have earned a higher salary compared to pathologists for at least the last 25 years. The listed salary is actually total compensation, which would include base salary and bonuses. Total compensation does not include the costs of fringe benefits.

AAMC publishes an annual salary survey, where the data are drawn from the University’s database. This is published every year, and most libraries will carry a current copy.

 

[2121115]

In your experience, what do you think a more common number is for new faculty and for >5 year faculty? Thanks!

Assistant profs that I know who had good training and publications started out at roughly 140K (I was told this was the high end of their offers, BTW). There are some faculty at my program who make >200K but they are late in their career, not with only 5 years experience. There are bonuses for production (i.e. sign out more cases) but it doesn't add up to more than 30K max (and that is for signing out tons of cases). Getting that kind of bonus would allow for little time for any real research because you'd be on service all the time (in other words, you might as well be in private practice).


Again, this is my personal experience. Dr. Remick obviously has a different experience.

 

[DrYoda]

Those numbers are probably pretty accurate if you include all benefits added in (as opposed to just straight salary). Academic programs often have fairly sizeable benefits in terms of retirement plan matching funds, health care, CME funds, things like that.

I do not know what family practitioners make in private practice but I do not think it is more than pathologists. I would be quite surprised if that was true.

Is it common practice for academic income quotes to be salary + benefits?

 

[yaah]

To be honest, I don't know. I would suspect the income quotes include some of the benefits but not all.

 

[pathstudent]

Is it common practice for academic income quotes to be salary + benefits?

Based on my experience no. Your salary is your monthly paycheck times 12

 

[BU Pathology]

Is it common practice for academic income quotes to be salary + benefits?

The AAMC survey lists total compensation, which is your salary and bonus (if you get a bonus). It does not include benefits, and it does not include items such as an funds to pay for journal subscriptions, attending meetings etc. Essentially, the total compensation is anything on which you would pay taxes.

There are some IRS rules about minor items, such as if the faculty practice plan buys you a laptop computer that cost is considered income. But if an office computer is purchased it is considered a business expense.

The AAMC salary survery is very accurate, and has been verified by independent surveys done by other groups. However, it does not capture outside income, such as speaking fees. For example, I reviewed a grant for NASA last year and the $100 (for about 6 hours of work) was not included.

 

[scurred]

That would be extremely rare for an academic institution to start a new graduate assistant prof at 180K of salary and even more extremely rare to be making 250K of salary in 5 years. That is salary deposited into bank account every month (not benefits etc).

I don't know, but that is definitely what they make. Their salaries are listed on an internal website.

 

[Lady Wintour]

The folloing webpage:

http://www.cejkasearch.com/compensation/amga_physician_compensation_survey.htm

quotes a much higher figure of 354 k as the median for a pathologist which is nearly the same as derm!

It is allvery confusing. Some say path is competitive and lucrative, some say it is doomed... *Sigh*

 

[Gyric]

I don't know, but that is definitely what they make. Their salaries are listed on an internal website.

Similar to my experience, less actually.

It seems reasonable that there would be significant variability in the desirability of academic jobs, just as there is with non-academic jobs.