Difference in "survey" salaries and numbers otherwise thrown around...

[osli]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I guess this is a general question that could go in a dozen of the boards here, but since I have been interested in Radiology for a while I'll ask (first?) here...

Why the huge discrepancy in posted salaries from surveys and the figures I hear from friends, physicians, and on forums. Some of those physicians are Radiologists themselves, so I can't discount all of those sources as full of it. Or maybe so?

I do understand that it seems one of the understood rules of the game are that medical students aren't supposed to know the "real" numbers on salaries until at least close to the match time. Or maybe they do... maybe it is exactly what you find in the surveys... but no one seems willing to confirm that. At least not in person, face to face. You aren't supposed to "ask about money." Understood. But it isn't just Radiology - it is across the board, in practically every specialty. Hell, just for family practice even the numbers are all over the place (which seems appropriate, given the diversity of job locations, situations, workloads, procedures done, business acuity, etc.).

Anyway, surveys put Radiology anywhere from upper 200's to mid 300's on average. Can't figure out if that is after expenses (malpractice, others?) or gross. Pre or post tax? Numbers "thrown around" here and elsewhere usually look more like 400k. When I ask recruiters at local hospitals (that I know well enough to ask) direct questions, I learn that none of the DR's or IR's on staff make less than 500k. Difference between net and gross? Difference between real income and "reported" income? Difference between fantasy and reality? What gives?

 

[hans19]

FYI the figures that are published are after expenses (including malpractice) and before taxes. You get a sense of the ball park and the figures are all over the charts because it really depends on your practice environment. Its not rocket science. If more of your patients are insured, you will make more. If you take less vacations, read more films per hour and work more hours per day, you'll be on the upper end of that spectrum.

Now with that in mind there are many reasons its not discussed.
First and foremost, how much money a person makes is none of your business. Its personal information. I don't care if you are a doctor or if you scoop chicken manure for a living. Its not something most people want to discuss openly. Especially to a stranger.

Second, most people think doctors make too much money, anyway. This is evidenced by the recent passage of the D.R.A. and the childrens health insurance initiative which basically will slash reimbursement by slashed 30-40% over the next 5 years for most specialties.

Third, what someone makes now may be totally be different than what you are offered when you finish, 5-6 years from now. And as stated initially, even then there will be a huge range between high and low.

When you are getting closer to finishing residency, you've paid your dues, you're part of the team, and you're looking around for a job, then you'll find that people will be more open with you.

 

[f_w]

Sounds like the survey data you are looking at is a bit outdated.

As hans pointed out, there is great variability involved in what you take home:

At the lower end, you will find well known academic departments and the goverment (military and VA).

In the mid-tier you will find private practices in the major metro areas and lower tier academia.

On the higher end you will find rural hospital practices and anyone who owns equipment (pre DRA).

 

[osli]

Thanks for the candid and honest answers.

I understand that what someone personally makes is none of my business, but in most other occupations you can find fairly consistent salary ranges, at least consistent within geographic locations and years of experience, etc. With most physician specialties, the variability is just huge depending on who you happen to be speaking with or where you happen to be looking. I suppose that, as you explained, the practice of medicine just inherently has more variability in it from one practice to the next.

No worries... for $100,000 a year I'd rather be a radiologist than a family practice physician, so if I can get into the field all will be well.

 

[f_w]

No worries... for $100,000 a year I'd rather be a radiologist than a family practice physician, so if I can get into the field all will be well.

Actually, at the end of the day, my FP colleagues had to make that call 'normal, not normal' about 25 times (with a lot more information available to them). I have to make that same call about 120 times in a day, I certainly wouldn't do that for a 100k.

 

[osli]

True. I'd certainly hope to get paid more for the longer training and higher level of responsibility in final diagnosis.

But, considering the actual practice of these two specialties, I'd take the "pay cut" to be a Radiologist. In a way I wish salaries weren't quite so high... it attracts a lot of intelligent students looking for that magic pay/lifestyle combination, and makes for a lot stiffer competition for me. 🙂