Bad job market

[raider]

The American Society for Clinical Pathology (ASCP) reported results from their annual survey. The survey reported 239 job seekers in 2009 compared to 268 in 2008. There was a 5% increase in applicants seeking more than 10 jobs and 5% decrease in those seeking academic jobs. In 2009, there was a 9% increase in job seekers who received no job offers. In the 2009 fellowship survey, 1446 responders sought a fellowship positions, almost 10% more than the previous year. Surgical Pathology, Hematopathology, and Cytopathology were the top three fellowships applied to. 61% of people sought one fellowship, 38% sought two fellowships, and 31% rated fellowships "necessary to a secure job" as the principle driving force behind doing a fellowship.

Even with all the BS SPIN from ASCP things are still bad. A more realistic survey would probably be too traumatic.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[raider]

the only truth is that we have been turned into expendible slaves by people who exploit others for their own personal benefit.

 

[raider]

When you consider this data in light of the fact that pathology has always been one of the worst job market among the medical specialities, you start getting a true sense of how bad things are.

Now do you want the red pill or the blue pill????

 

[yaah]

Is there a link to this? I haven't seen it. It seems like a crappy survey design if it is a job market survey but there are 1400+ respondents applying for fellowships vs 230 applying for real jobs. What does, "seeking more than 10 jobs" mean? The only interesting data point you posted was the 9% increase in those receiving no job offers. The rest doesn't seem helpful or even understandable.

 

[Leukocyte]

You can not make your cake and eat it too....

Look, Unlike Family Medicine (and clinical medicine specialties in general)...Pathology is a RELATIVELY "cool" specialty, offering the Pathologist A F@@king Life. Like it or not, it is a "life style" specialty. Worlds and worlds away from the "trenches" were clinical medicine practitioners battle.

As a PGY-3 in primary care, I am bombarded with job ads all over the US. All of my graduating class already have Jobs at this time. Yes, If you go into Family Medicine you are GUARANTEED A JOB, and people will be literaly begging you to come join them (the lowest offer my classmates had was a 180,000/year as a new grad).

Well that is fine and dandy IF you like clinical medicine. Although I am a PGY-3, unlike my classmates I REFUSE to get a job as a FM, no matter what the pay is. Why? Because I HATE IT. Having a guaranteed job security as a primary care doc with a beginer salary of 180-220,000 is great....but it does not mean nothing to me. Unlike my classmates, who will be attendings next year, I will be applying to a second residency! Yes, in Pathology. I do not care if the job market is bad. I am willing to take a pay-cut rather than work one day "in the trenches" of primary care. Money is nothing if you are unhappy.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[raider]

Like it or not, it is a "life style" specialty. Worlds and worlds away from the "trenches" were clinical medicine practitioners battle.

Wow !Melodrama

I just love it when people who have never practiced pathology make such interesting statements. Dude, I sign out 30-40 cases each day out of which 10 or more cases are A CANCER diagnosis based at times on VERY SOFT CRITERIA. THIS DIAGNOSIS FROM ME IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE PATIENTS SUBSEQUENT CLINICAL COURSE. AS AN EXAMPLE, I GET AN FNA FROM A LUNG AND THERE IS A SINGLE POORLY PRESERVED SLIDE WITH MAYBE FOUR CELL CLUSTERS AND I HAVE TO DECIDE WhETHER IT IS A LYMPHOMA OR A SMALL CELL CARCINOMA OR MAYBE A METASTATIC MELANOMA. IF I AM WRONG IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW SKILLFUL OR GOOD ANY OTHER SPECIALIST IS SURGEON, ONCOLOGIST OR WHATEVER. IF I AM WRONG THEY ARE ALL GOING TO GO THE WRONG WAY.

THE PATHOLOGIST IS THE GENERAL (GUIDANCE) AND IF THE FOOT SOLDIERS (SUPPOSEDLY IN THE TRENCHES) HAVE ANY CHANCE OF WINNING, IT DEPENDS ON THE GENERALS ABILITY who carries the GRAVEST RESPONSIBILITY on his shoulders.


SEE THERE IS A LOT OF STUPID PROPAGANDA ABOUT THE ROLE OF EACH DOCTOR IN PATIENT CARE (SOME PERPETUATED/GLMORIZED BY THOSE WHO SEE TV DRAMAS LIKE GREYS ANATOMY AND OTHER MYTHS SPREAD BY DISGRUNTLED CLINICIANS)
THE BOTTOMLINE IS :AN EXCELLENT PATHOLOGIST IS JUST LIKE YODA, THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT AND THE BEST DOCTOR/JEDI WITH THE MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSBILITY IN PATIENT CARE: GUIDING WHICH PATH EVERYONE ELSE SHOULD TAKE.


HENCE BECOME A PATHOLOGIST IF YOU HAVE A TALENT FOR DIAGNOSIS NOT BECAUSE OF A PRECEIVED "EASY LIFE STYLE" .

 

[Parts Unknown]

Wow !Melodrama

There just has to be some irony here.

 

[Unty]

Pathology is the shiznits. If you good at what you do you will find a job homie!!!!!!!! I WORK MY ASS OFF EVERYDAY HOMIE...AND ONE DAY IM GOING TO BE A BADASS PATHOLOGIST DAWG!

If y'all feeling me let me hear ya!!!!!!!!!

Peace!

 

[2121115]

Pathology is the shiznits. If you good at what you do you will find a job homie!!!!!!!! I WORK MY ASS OFF EVERYDAY HOMIE...AND ONE DAY IM GOING TO BE A BADASS PATHOLOGIST DAWG!

If y'all feeling me let me hear ya!!!!!!!!!

Peace!

If you want to live in Kansas, Wisconsin, Michigan, Minnesota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, or somewhere else in the midwest there are tons of partnerships track private practice jobs (according to pathologyoutlines and cap.org). Everywhere else in the country there are employee jobs and megalabs.

 

[lipomas]

There just has to be some irony here.

lol

The best pathologists collaborate and communicate with clinicians, so that you are not always the only soldier out there making the decision in isolation.

One can define the job market "sucking" in many ways. Leukocyte pointed out one way in which the job market sucks, in that he doesn't want any of the available jobs. Raider pointed out another, in which some people have trouble finding good jobs. I know people in many other careers who are getting their two weeks' notice after 20 years at a stable job. Others who get their pay drastically reduced without much explanation. Why do people think medicine is somehow an exception to this? There are huge changes going on in the way health care is paid for and delivered. I do not have high hopes that these changes are going to positively impact the lives of anyone other than large corporations, certain private hospitals, and large academic institutions. Physicians of all types are going to get the shaft.

 

[rollwithit]

Like it or not, it is a "life style" specialty. Worlds and worlds away from the "trenches" were clinical medicine practitioners battle.

Wow !Melodrama

I just love it when people who have never practiced pathology make such interesting statements. Dude, I sign out 30-40 cases each day out of which 10 or more cases are A CANCER diagnosis based at times on VERY SOFT CRITERIA. THIS DIAGNOSIS FROM ME IS THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE PATIENTS SUBSEQUENT CLINICAL COURSE. AS AN EXAMPLE, I GET AN FNA FROM A LUNG AND THERE IS A SINGLE POORLY PRESERVED SLIDE WITH MAYBE FOUR CELL CLUSTERS AND I HAVE TO DECIDE WhETHER IT IS A LYMPHOMA OR A SMALL CELL CARCINOMA OR MAYBE A METASTATIC MELANOMA. IF I AM WRONG IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW SKILLFUL OR GOOD ANY OTHER SPECIALIST IS SURGEON, ONCOLOGIST OR WHATEVER. IF I AM WRONG THEY ARE ALL GOING TO GO THE WRONG WAY.

THE PATHOLOGIST IS THE GENERAL (GUIDANCE) AND IF THE FOOT SOLDIERS (SUPPOSEDLY IN THE TRENCHES) HAVE ANY CHANCE OF WINNING, IT DEPENDS ON THE GENERALS ABILITY who carries the GRAVEST RESPONSIBILITY on his shoulders.


SEE THERE IS A LOT OF STUPID PROPAGANDA ABOUT THE ROLE OF EACH DOCTOR IN PATIENT CARE (SOME PERPETUATED/GLMORIZED BY THOSE WHO SEE TV DRAMAS LIKE GREYS ANATOMY AND OTHER MYTHS SPREAD BY DISGRUNTLED CLINICIANS)
THE BOTTOMLINE IS :AN EXCELLENT PATHOLOGIST IS JUST LIKE YODA, THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT AND THE BEST DOCTOR/JEDI WITH THE MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSBILITY IN PATIENT CARE: GUIDING WHICH PATH EVERYONE ELSE SHOULD TAKE.


HENCE BECOME A PATHOLOGIST IF YOU HAVE A TALENT FOR DIAGNOSIS NOT BECAUSE OF A PRECEIVED "EASY LIFE STYLE" .

It appears you are passionate about something. But, I can't figure out what it is. Please press your Caps Lock key again and quit typing like a lunatic. You may have a good point or two to make. But, I'm not going to waste my time filtering through the big letters. Thanks.

 

[path24]

A past post for everyone.....the past pathology job market was crap, the current pathology job market is crap, and the future pathology job market is going to be crap.....I think that about sums it up.


Hi Everybody,

My opinion is that the US Pathology Job Market is terrible. There are several pieces of evidence in support of this. One is an ASCP Resident Survey from 1996 available on the internet at:

http://ascp.ais.net/member/rps/surveys/surwi96.asp

An important quote from that article: ..."Almost half (49%) had received no job offer, 30% one offer, 13% two offers, and 4% three offers".

Secondy, if one checks the CAP positions listing service at

http://www.cap.org/html/member/secure/pls.html

As of 1/15/99, the total number of Pathologists Seeking Positions is 182,
the total number of Positions Available is 68 for a ratio of 2.67 job seekers per job. My own experience from dealing with the CAP Positions Listing Service is that many of the Positions Available ads are dated. Even
if you send a resume to a recent listing you will get a polite rejection letter (or NO letter) stating that they have received large numbers of resumes from qualified applicants.

Thirdly, according to an article published in JAMA, the reference is JAMA, 275(9):708-12 1996 Mar 6, "Of those (graduting residents) seeking employment, the percentage who did not find a full-time position in their
specialty or subspecialty ranged between none in urology to 10.8% in pathology".

These articles suggest that Pathologists graduting from training in the US stand a 10.8% chance of being unemployed and a 49% chance of being underemployed and going from Fellowship to Fellowship while searching for
an attending level position.

The experience of the people who graduated from Residency at about the same time I did seems to confirm that the job market is terrible.

Phil Dauterman, MD

 

[exPCM]

Everyone in pathology with integrity and half a brain knows the job market in pathology is terrible.
About 1/3 to 1/2 of path programs should be closed to help rectify the oversupply and eliminate the subpar training programs.
IMO part of the problem is as follows:
1. The ASCP leaders continue to put out junk like this:http://arpa.allenpress.com/arpaonli...=10.1043/1543-2165(2007)131[1767b:IR]2.0.CO;2
2. In addition we have the USCAP's Dr. Silva doing presentations like this: http://www.pathologyportal.org/95th/pdf/housestaff.pdf

In my opinion these "leaders" in pathology are perpetrators of "the Big Lie" technique of propaganda, which is based on the principle that a lie, if audacious enough and repeated enough times, will be believed by the masses.

 

[yaah]

Can we please stop posting 10-15 year old data? That tells us absolutely nothing except for the fact that the job market was bad 10-15 years ago.

 

[pathstudent]

Can we please stop posting 10-15 year old data? That tells us absolutely nothing except for the fact that the job market was bad 10-15 years ago.

Word to the mother!

I was just looking at pathoutlines.com. There are a crapload of available jobs across the country from the glitzy coastal cities to the Sarah Palin-loving midwest.

If you can't find a good job, it might be a you problem and not a pathology problem.

 

[Thrombus]

Word to the mother!

I was just looking at pathoutlines.com. There are a crapload of available jobs across the country from the glitzy coastal cities to the Sarah Palin-loving midwest.

If you can't find a good job, it might be a you problem and not a pathology problem.

Those jobs are getting 50+ applications on a consistent basis. If you are lucky, you will be one of 4-5 "competitive" applicants to be interviewed.

Unfortunately, medical students such as yourself are blindly naive to what is going on in the real world. Of course you consistently make your ignorance known to nearly all (with self-exclusion of course) with every post so carry on.

 

[cozmopak]

Those jobs are getting 50+ applications on a consistent basis. If you are lucky, you will be one of 4-5 "competitive" applicants to be interviewed.

Unfortunately, medical students such as yourself are blindly naive to what is going on in the real world. Of course you consistently make your ignorance known to nearly all (with self-exclusion of course) with every post so carry on.

Dude, so much negativity. Wow.

 

[komradrobot]

Dude, so much negativity. Wow.

yeah just go to dental school already

 

[SkinPath]

Can we please stop posting 10-15 year old data? That tells us absolutely nothing except for the fact that the job market was bad 10-15 years ago.

I actually thought that that post illustrated a valid and excellent point.

There was an email sent recently to the PRODS by Barbara McKenna saying that we are anticipating a HUGE shortage of pathologists and so we must train more pathologists now, even if there are currently not enough jobs available, in anticipation of that shortage. She went on to say that if we do not train enough pathologists now, pathology will collapse when that shortage is finally upon us because there will not be enough people doing the job. Black-Schaffer, PD at MGH, seconded McKenna's arguments. The email was sent as a plea to all program directors to support their plan to lobby for more pathology residency slots.

The data from 15 years ago illustrates that this belief that somehow there will be a shortage of pathologists has been going on for years and it still has not happened. Hence, the post was very helpful, informative, and quite enlightening, IMO.

 

[green mantis]

There was an email sent to the PRODS by Barbara McKenna recently saying that we are anticipating a HUGE shortage of pathologists and so we must train more pathologists now, even if there are currently not enough jobs available, in anticipation of that shortage. She went on to say that if we do not train enough pathologists now, when that shortage is finally upon us, pathology will collapse because there will not be enough people doing the job. Black-Schaffer, PD at MGH, seconded McKenna's arguments. The email was sent as a plea to all program directors to support their plan to lobby for more pathology residency slots.

If someone has a copy of that email, they should post it.


----- Antony

 

[Parts Unknown]

Those jobs are getting 50+ applications on a consistent basis. If you are lucky, you will be one of 4-5 "competitive" applicants to be interviewed.

I actually was one of those 4-5, and was offered the job. The group told me that they had received about 50 CVs, but only 4-5 of the applicants had the subspecialty training they specifically requested in the job ad. I reckon the other 45-46 were just fishing.

 

[2121115]

I would like to hear from any group or academic center that is looking for a bright young pathologist and can't seem to find anyone.

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?




If it were true that there was a shortage of pathologists, then this situation would be common, or at least not uncommon. But in reality this situation is unheard of. The very day that those jobs get posted on pathoutlines they get applications from every senior resident in the country. All with more or less identical CV's. Moreover, there really aren't that many jobs posted there. Even if there are 100 jobs currently being advertised there are what 400-something residents finishing every year? Wow.

 

[path24]

It proves the history of pathologists not caring about the future of pathology. The job market will never be strong....history proves the point.

45+ fishing (are you kidding me)........no 45+ that need a job so bad that they have to apply to something. I am sure that they (and their families) would find it real entertaining that they were actually just testing the waters.

I know a few fellows that would love a job. I know a ton of residents that would love a job also. Actually every resident I know would love to have a job lined up. Almost not possible in pathology.....every other area of medicine is it possible (in a lot of cases easy)?...YEP!

At least we know that there are individuals on here that will continue to put out the robust job reports and presentations on the shortage of pathologists. So much for reality. So much for the constant bad market threads on here.

 

[lipomas]

Word to the mother!

I was just looking at pathoutlines.com. There are a crapload of available jobs across the country from the glitzy coastal cities to the Sarah Palin-loving midwest.

If you can't find a good job, it might be a you problem and not a pathology problem.

A lot of the jobs there are not great, and others are only applicable to a segment of the applicant pool (dermpath trained, gyn path trained, whatever). Of course, for those convinced that the job market is terrible any open position must automatically be a terrible job. And for those convinced that we need to train more pathologists, they can just list the number of open positions and say there are so many open positions openly advertising for pathologists. The truth is, as always, somewhere in the middle. There are good jobs out there. Many are not advertised, or only recruit through certain select ways or targeted advertisements. Most quality residents "somehow" are still managing to find good jobs. Many are not able to. I don't totally agree with some previous comments that have said that the fact that any graduating resident cannot find a job is a horrible indictment of the job market. I don't think it is (because there are some woefully bad pathology residents out there), but I don't know at what point and what number of people having difficult it becomes a horrible indictment. You shouldn't have to apply all across the country to find a good job, but sometimes you do. This is true in most other professions as well. I think in medicine we tend to get spoiled, and expect things to not be a problem for us, but this is naive. It is also very hard to separate the pathology job market from the realities of the current economic downturn and difficulties across the board. I think pathology is unquestionably worse than most other specialties, but better than most other professions.

In general though, I would agree with your statement that if you can't find a job, it might be your problem (although there obviously would be pathology job market problem also). People who can't find a job should seriously look at their application, their interview skills, and the way they relate to other people. Because people doing hiring LOOK at these things.

 

[BrainPathology]

I would like to hear from any group or academic center that is looking for a bright young pathologist and can't seem to find anyone.

Bueller? Bueller? Bueller?




If it were true that there was a shortage of pathologists, then this situation would be common, or at least not uncommon. But in reality this situation is unheard of. The very day that those jobs get posted on pathoutlines they get applications from every senior resident in the country. All with more or less identical CV's. Moreover, there really aren't that many jobs posted there. Even if there are 100 jobs currently being advertised there are what 400-something residents finishing every year? Wow.

The last 3 openings at the place I trained took over 2 years each to fill. 2 dermpath positions and 1 hemepath position. They actually let the residents in on part of the hiring process so we got to know the candidates some. The 2 dermpaths went to American trained and graduated people who were actually interesting to talk to, were fairly well informed and had passed AP/CP boards on their first attempts. They probably brought in 4 or 5 other people that were arrogant, psycho killer creepy, impossible to understand, smelled like a homeless person (or traditional pathologist-not sure), or a combination of the above. And these are people they sorted through that they couldn't tell were broken somehow from the resumes or cover letters. Either there was wildly off-putting text or not a single subject and verb in the same tense - some were truly, truly ghastly.

<OThe hemepath position was even worse. It was ultimately given to someone still in fellowship who was the least impossible to understand and the easiest to get along with.

<OAll three positions are partnership track jobs starting with good pay in a group who does not fire people just before partner. (My definition of good pay is 180-240/yr and partner was after 4 years with a 1/2 partner status during the 4th year whatever that means. I know that level of pay is basically a wal-mart greeter to some of you here but I'd sign for that to start without much hesitation given the potential and other things the group has)

<OI just don't know how to reconcile this with all the talk of a terrible market. It's obviously not perfect or everyone would be happy. I don't necessarily think there is a glut of competent pathologists but I can definitely get behind the idea that there is a glut of *****s who graduate pathology residency training programs. If you're good, if you're not a jerk, if you can actually be imagined as a coworker someone would enjoy I think you'll get a good job. The other ones might be the people taking all the crap jobs that then become what people expect the good ones to work for. <O

 

[Nilf]

IMO a reasonable time to partner is 2 years MAX. Anything more than that smells fishy and makes me suspicious that the group never intends to make you one.

 

[green mantis]

no 45+ that need a job so bad that they have to apply to something. I am sure that they (and their families) would find it real entertaining that they were actually just testing the waters.

That's probably not entirely true. Based on some of the positions I've applied to, many don't list the subspecialties they're looking for. They'll just post an ad for a fellowship trained pathologist. I'm sure most groups realize that if they're not in a desirable part of the country, they probably won't get someone w/ DP, GI path, HP, etc. If people, who have done one of those fellowships just happens to apply, they'll get placed in the interview pool.

Also, applying for a job is incredibly easy. How difficult can it be to email a CV & letter of interest?


----- Antony

 

[V Garrison]

I'm not sure if it's accurate to say the path job market is bad. I think it's just specific.

The field is so broad, and becoming rapidly sub-sub-sub-specialized, that employers are simply looking for specific qualities / training.

Unfortunately, what with the breakneck pace of technological advancement and the overall flux in the pathologist's role, it is difficult to look down the road and anticipate what type of training will be highest in demand.

The result? The most consistent advice I'm hearing from mentors is to broaden your skills. Try to get into a well-recognized program, combined AP/CP, be a super star, and do AT LEAST one fellowship (again, at respected sites). Easier said than done, of course.

I heard somewhere that 95% of current path residents plan to do a fellowship, and that 70%+ plan to do at least two. I ran into one guy who was a PGY10...though I think his "plan" had more to do with lack of initiative than building up his resume.

It'd be nice if anyone knew the source for those statistics...I'm afraid I've completely forgotten where I read them or how accurate they may be.

 

[path24]

I agree its easy to apply, but who applies just to apply? I can think of a lot more fun things to do on a saturday night. Even if what you say is true...lets take away five people. You then have 40+ (not 45+) applying for a job. Still crap.

Tough to find a dermatopathologist....why??? Because there is a SHORTAGE (just a few fellowships that are crazy competitive). Obviously! This could be the same for all pathologists....but never will be.

Spent two years looking for candidates....well it sounds like the system didn't collapse while they waited. Sounds like the work still got done. How bad were they really needed? Apparently no that bad.

All of the supposed crappy candidates. Then get rid of programs that are producing them. With the amount of bad candidates out there (according to some people's estimates on here that there are tons) I would say about a quarter of the programs should be shut down immediately.

I still know quite a few people that would love a job.

 

[Parts Unknown]

I agree its easy to apply, but who applies just to apply?

I wouldn't say they are applying just to apply, but outside of personal contacts most job hunting strategies are inherently low yield. I sent a few CVs myself to jobs based solely on location, despite the fact that my subspecialty was not mentioned in the ad. This approach landed zero interviews, but nothing ventured is nothing gained.

People have been quoting this 50 applicants/job number quite a bit, but in my anecdotal experience I was really only competing with 4 people, not 49. The difference between those two numbers is pretty significant.

This leads to a question I find more interesting: how many active job hunters cannot land a position by graduation?

 

[Adrian Cocot]

IMO a reasonable time to partner is 2 years MAX. Anything more than that smells fishy and makes me suspicious that the group never intends to make you one.

I guess that's one way of looking at it. IMO tt's not the time to partnership that's important (although anything more than 4 is excessive -- 3 seems to be par for the course these days) but rather whether the contract you sign makes any mention about conditions/eligibility for partnership or not.

You're just as likely to get screwed by someone who offers you partnership after 2 years as you are by someone who offers you partnership after 3 or 4.

 

[yaah]

The result? The most consistent advice I'm hearing from mentors is to broaden your skills. Try to get into a well-recognized program, combined AP/CP, be a super star, and do AT LEAST one fellowship (again, at respected sites). Easier said than done, of course.

It is hard to predict. I did AP/CP and one fellowship. At my job now I do a lot with my fellowship, but also do a lot of general surg path, cytopath, and hemepath, plus all the general CP stuff. Only about 1/3 of my group does heme, and only about 1/4 does cyto. Part of the reason I got my job (the fellowship being a major reason, and recommendations being another huge reason) was that I had broad skills and interests that I had demonstrated. Being superspecialized and doing only that (like only dermpath) can be attractive but many groups (often the better jobs, by the way) won't hire you if that's all you are going to do.

I also agree that the 3 years to partnership is much more realistic than 2 years to partnership, especially if partnership is a good thing at your group. And this is not new. Many groups have actually dropped their time to partnership from what it was many years ago.

And I also agree that it is exceedingly easy these days to "apply" for a job. There are different ways of applying, of course, but just sending your CV (often by email) takes very little time, hence why some people apply to some places they wouldn't bother with if it was more time consuming.

This leads to a question I find more interesting: how many active job hunters cannot land a position by graduation?

I would love to know the answer to this too. I would also love to know the reasons (as described both by the applicant as well as those who reject them) why it's true. This would be very interesting data.

 

[path24]

I wouldn't say they are applying just to apply, but outside of personal contacts most job hunting strategies are inherently low yield. I sent a few CVs myself to jobs based solely on location, despite the fact that my subspecialty was not mentioned in the ad. This approach landed zero interviews, but nothing ventured is nothing gained.

People have been quoting this 50 applicants/job number quite a bit, but in my anecdotal experience I was really only competing with 4 people, not 49. The difference between those two numbers is pretty significant.

This leads to a question I find more interesting: how many active job hunters cannot land a position by graduation?

You ended up competing against 4 people....40-50+ still applied though. Which does say something about the job market.....its not good.

Good question....I would also like to see an answer to that.

 

[Parts Unknown]

You ended up competing against 4 people....40-50+ still applied though.

I wonder how many would have applied if there were an application form to fill out, a personal statement to write, and three letters of reference to supply.

I'm not going to argue that the job market couldn't be better. I suspect the market is even tighter than normal this year, probably attributable to the economic downturn and the uncertainty of health care reform. However, this 50 applicants/job is IMHO an emotional appeal, intended to make things seem even worse than they really are. The simple fact is that we don't have the data necessary to draw solid, quantitative conclusions about the job market this year (or any year). The crap supplied by by the ASCP has more holes than the Nevada Proving Ground, and reciting testimonials from PathOutlines is even worse. When you have numbers that can be spun in divergent directions, your numbers suck.

 

[path24]

I wonder how many would have applied if there were an application form to fill out, a personal statement to write, and three letters of reference to supply.

I'm not going to argue that the job market couldn't be better. I suspect the market is even tighter than normal this year, probably attributable to the economic downturn and the uncertainty of health care reform. However, this 50 applicants/job is IMHO an emotional appeal, intended to make things seem even worse than they really are. The simple fact is that we don't have the data necessary to draw solid, quantitative conclusions about the job market this year (or any year). The crap supplied by by the ASCP has more holes than the Nevada Proving Ground, and reciting testimonials from PathOutlines is even worse. When you have numbers that can be spun in divergent directions, your numbers suck.

People are looking for jobs....putting a roof over their head and food on the table. Who cares how thick the application is. We have been filling out forms for years already.

I have seen emails from private groups saying they received over 50 CVs. I know fellows who are struggling to get interviews even. I don't need any data, study or numbers....like the crap currently out there. I know fellows that are struggling and worried. That is more than enough proof. It doesn't get any more real then that. The job market is a joke.

 

[Parts Unknown]

People are looking for jobs....putting a roof over their head and food on the table. Who cares how thick the application is.

The people who are just sending CVs everywhere because it is easy. That was the point of my speculation.

I know fellows who are struggling to get interviews even. I don't need any data, study or numbers....like the crap currently out there. I know fellows that are struggling and worried. That is more than enough proof. It doesn't get any more real then that.

Herein lies the problem: I am a fellow who is not a rock star, and not training at a top flight institution, and I had obtained multiple interviews and private practice job offers by the end of November. I don't know how to reconcile my experience with that of your colleagues.

I would suggest a term for those who are content to bolster their views with anecdote while shunning the prospect of quantitative, critical analysis: intellectually ****ing lazy.

 

[Thrombus]

The people who are just sending CVs everywhere because it is easy. That was the point of my speculation.



Herein lies the problem: I am a fellow who is not a rock star, and not training at a top flight institution, and I had obtained multiple interviews and private practice job offers by the end of November. I don't know how to reconcile my experience with that of your colleagues.

I would suggest a term for those who are content to bolster their views with anecdote while shunning the prospect of quantitative, critical analysis: intellectually ****ing lazy.

What do you offer other than your own anecdote? Seems like you are "content to bolster their views with anecdote while shunning the prospect of quantitative, critical analysis: intellectually ****ing lazy"

 

[lipomas]

What do you offer other than your own anecdote? Seems like you are "content to bolster their views with anecdote while shunning the prospect of quantitative, critical analysis: intellectually ****ing lazy"

Maybe he should provide some 10 year old data

In all seriousness though, isn't most of what gets posted on here anecdote anyway? Some of it is hearsay anecdote, and some direct, but most of it is anecdotal. You aren't really allowed, if you're being intellectually honest, to ignore anecdotes which don't fit your bias and prop up anecdotes that do fit it. Part of the problem is absence of quality data that is NOT TEN YEARS OLD. The only anecdote that really matters is your own.

 

[path24]

Well I can go down to the unemployed fellows offices and ask them if they have some data, numbers, studies....so I can know if the job market is bad. If not, I'll let them know I am going need to see some data in order to believe its true. (Of course this type of thinking will probable land me a govt job in about 5 seconds)

In a decent job market people don't apply, even if it is as easy as a couple of clicks....they are busying enjoying the other aspects of their lives because employment is not a concern.

Congrats on your job hunt...the only time I have heard of a good job hunt is on this forum. Never have from talking to individuals. If you are aware of all these jobs out there....you should start a thread posting them (if the aren't on pathoutlines or CAP). Provide the proof and help out your colleagues who are struggling.

 

[yaah]

Congrats on your job hunt...the only time I have heard of a good job hunt is on this forum. Never have from talking to individuals. If you are aware of all these jobs out there....you should start a thread posting them (if the aren't on pathoutlines or CAP). Provide the proof and help out your colleagues who are struggling.

See, you have it wrong though (for better or for worse). In a sense, it doesn't really matter that much if YOU think the job market is bad, because those in power with the ability to make any significant changes do not think it is bad. So, unfortunately, the onus is on people like you to demonstrate that the job market is bad. And unfortunately, the only attempts that have been made to "prove" the job market is bad consist of anonymous internet forum posts and hysterical screaming at national meeting forums. None of this is proof, and none of it is EVER going to convince anyone who needs to be convinced. When all you have is rumor and anecdote, it doesn't help much, particularly when many people do not complain about the job market. I have posted this before - I have talked to many many residents, in my program and in others. The majority who had tested the job market had found it "not as bad as people said it was." The ones who have had trouble have had issues that likely contributed (personality issues, work ethic, limiting themselves to one specific area and type of job, communication skills, etc). You can kick and scream all you want on internet forums and accuse those who disagree with you with being biased or naive, but that doesn't help matters.

 

[Parts Unknown]

What do you offer other than your own anecdote?

An admission that we don't have enough data to accurately characterize the job market. I'm not holding up my personal story as proof pudding that the job market is hunky dory. I am holding up my personal story because the disparity between my experience and the one presented on these forums is perplexing to me. Being inquisitive, I would like to be able to resolve this conundrum. Thanks for all your thoughtful input.

 

[Parts Unknown]

Congrats on your job hunt...the only time I have heard of a good job hunt is on this forum. Never have from talking to individuals. If you are aware of all these jobs out there....you should start a thread posting them (if the aren't on pathoutlines or CAP). Provide the proof and help out your colleagues who are struggling.

I haven't done anything extraordinary. Perhaps the most important benefits I have are 1. little in the way of geographic preference, 2. fellowship training in one of the ostensibly desirable subspecialties, and 3. I'm American.

Online most of my job hunting has been on pathoutlines and the CAP site, which is essentially Medhunters. There are many other recruitment sites where you can post your CV. The posting itself isn't very valuable, except that it will allow trolling recruiters to find you. Or you can contact recruiters directly, like Merritt Hawkins or Sante Consulting. Aside from that, Google is your friend. Hunt down every group you can in the area you wish to live, snap some balls on, and cold call them. Most people are quite friendly.

 

[path24]

Not interested in providing proof. Considering how long the problem has been there (mid 90s at least)...no amount of proof is going to change the minds of the *****s who are running this show. If I did have numbers, a study....I would put a large some of cash on it being ignored.

I think it is more about warning med students about the situation. You may not live where you would like, you get to compete against every group in the country for biopsies, residency doesn't equal job, and you might end up an employee rather than as an independent practicing physician. I think med students need to actually look (talk to groups) for a job to see the reality. Depending on their priorities, pathology may be a very poor choice.

Yep, I still know unemployed fellows who would like a job.

 

[2121115]

Congrats on your job hunt...the only time I have heard of a good job hunt is on this forum. Never have from talking to individuals.

By contrast, I have never heard of an unsuccessful job hunt EXCEPT on this forum. In fact, in talking to individuals I have only heard success stories. Maybe it is a pride thing and nobody wants to admit failure in person, I get that. And granted, the only pathologists that I know who have looked for a job are the residents in my program that have finished in the past 3-4 years and other residents that I meet at CAP and other places. To a person, everyone I have spoken with said their perception of the job market was bad but they were "somehow" able to get a good job. My job hunt is just now starting and I may wind up unemployed or in BFE somewhere but if so I would be the first person that I know of to have been in such a situation.

I think it is more about warning med students about the situation. You may not live where you would like, you get to compete against every group in the country for biopsies, residency doesn't equal job, and you might end up an employee rather than as an independent practicing physician.

True, true, and true. I was told these exact things when choosing pathology as a medical student by the residents at my medical school. I did pathology anyway. Maybe it will turn out to be a poor choice, I don't know. But I really like being a pathologist and I'm going to do my best to make it work.

 

[path24]

It depends on how you define successful job hunt. I know fellows that have done multiple fellowships because they couldn't get a job. You look for a job and can't find one so you scramble for a fellowship. You then try for a job the next year. I would count these as unsuccessful job hunts. I think it is becoming more and more common to see individuals doing multiple fellowships. In a poor job market this will be the new standard. Why hire a doc with one fellowship when you can hire one with 2+ fellowships.

 

[2121115]

Why hire a doc with one fellowship when you can hire one with 2+ fellowships.

I can think of a lot of reasons and I know of groups who don't see 2+ fellowships as a positive.

 

[lipomas]

It depends on how you define successful job hunt. I know fellows that have done multiple fellowships because they couldn't get a job. You look for a job and can't find one so you scramble for a fellowship. You then try for a job the next year. I would count these as unsuccessful job hunts. I think it is becoming more and more common to see individuals doing multiple fellowships. In a poor job market this will be the new standard. Why hire a doc with one fellowship when you can hire one with 2+ fellowships.

Most people who do multiple fellowships do them without also applying for jobs. The job hunt timeline happens later in the year than the fellowship timeline does (fellowships often have their application cycle from 18 months prior to start date to about 1 year prior, whereas jobs are often 6-9 months prior to start date).

 

[Thrombus]

Most people who do multiple fellowships do them without also applying for jobs. The job hunt timeline happens later in the year than the fellowship timeline does (fellowships often have their application cycle from 18 months prior to start date to about 1 year prior, whereas jobs are often 6-9 months prior to start date).

I know folks who are good pathologists who got employed after 1 fellowship.

I know folks who are good pathologists who cannot get employed after a fellowship and have to "scramble" into another fellowship.

I know folks who do 2 fellowships then get employed.

I know folks who do 2 fellowships and cannot get employed.

Bottom Line = NO OTHER MEDICAL SPECIALTY IS LIKE THIS. Pathology is by far and away the worst field in the medical profession for getting a job and something must be done about it. There is too much anecdotal evidence behind it. You will not find another speciality where dozens upon dozens of many desparate and also many QUALIFIED physicians apply for a single job in the middle of nowhere.

All you need for proof is to call up any of the last couple months in pathoutlines private jobs in seemingly remote locations and ask them about the applicant pool. For the intellectually lazy, this is even easy for them. A couple of clicks and a phone call.

 

[JPR22]

2 fellowships means at least 6 years of training, you could have done gen.surg + fellowship, or IM + fellowship in that time. Also 2 years in a fellowship, unless its surg-path means 2 years away from general signout.

 

[TX515]

Yes one could do IM or surgery, but they're not for me.