Job market tight across the country

[Unty]

Talked today to a director of a locums tenens company with 50+ years of experience.

She said the job market for pathology is tight across the country.

So to all the naysayers who think the job market is rosy or that what I’ve been saying here is just “hearsay or assumption”, you are wrong or you work for CAP.

Why do I continue to make posts about the job market. It’s because people here are saying the job market is great or CAP says it’s rosy when I’m actually hearing the opposite.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Oh no, another thread with "job" in the title. Get ready for another article about SDN keeping people from pursuing pathology.

 

[Unty]

The next article should actually be about cutting the number of residency slots to improve this so called tight job market which has been relayed to me by recruiters.

Big labs employing pathologists from an oversupplied market.

Pathology has the worst job market in medicine? Anyone can name another field with a worse job market?

This post from reddit explains it all:

Let me translate this: I have no clinical pathology experience. I need someone to tell me how can I impress the people interviewing me.

Too many residency spots opens the floodgates to candidates like this. Random applicants with no pathology rotations just looking to get a spot somewhere.

 

[PathDoctor]

Pathology has the second worst job market in medicine.
Nuclear medicine has the worst job market.

"The issue of what may constitute optimal train-
ing pathways for nuclear medicine and molecular
imaging has been of major interest and discussion
over the past decade (1–7). The underlying reasons
for these efforts are multifactorial but include the
evolving landscape for clinical nuclear medicine
practice, such as introduction and rapid adoption of
multimodality imaging; development of novel in-
strumentation, radiopharmaceuticals, and
theranostics; and the realities of overall poor pro-
spects in the job market for those physicians trained
only in nuclear medicine (NM) without certification
in diagnostic radiology (DR)."

http://snmmi.files.cms-plus.com/news/ptfnm_report_for_web.pdf

 

[deleted314957]

Only the academics and/or the grandees at CAP spout that nonsense about a rosy job market. Having said that, most everyone does get a job but they are too often hard as hell to find and may be so elusive that folks must do second or third fellowships depending on timing and availability. There is little or no geographic flexibility. There is essentially no one actively recruiting paths. Sign on bonuses are almost unheard of. Pay is middlin’ and going down. P.P. partnership track positions are vanishing. The field is not at all competitive and attracts more than it’s share of lower/poor performers. Too many people MUST take
WHATEVER they can get.

It really is not a good market for other than academics. And most paths would rather dig ditches than spend an entire career in academics. A stint in academics may be useful to pick up some experience in order to get out. Same with the military.

It is, as noted so often before, supply and demand. Now, will this pendulum swing like it did for Psychiatry? Over the course of the next decade or two, it well may, as folks are realizing how tough the market is. By that time, however, I believe essentially all physicians will be in an employee and/ or single payer system and God forbid if they have to compete for bundled payments.

 

[gbwillner]

What I hear from you is "get ready to dismiss any dissenting opinion."

The issue here is that a Locums person tells you something, which aligns with your own beliefs, so it is true. However, when others have a different view, or even published studies looking at a lot more data that disagrees with you or others who frequent these forums, it is biased or worse, it is propaganda put out by CAP, who not only seems to control everything, but is set on destroying pathology practice.

Look, I won't bother to argue with your premise. I have said before that the market is a complex thing with more than that one variable causing mischief. Practicing pathology is not the same today as it was 20 years ago, and it will be even more different in another 20. The quality and quantity of the market is shaded depending on your perception of what "good" is. If we gauge the market by the % of pathologists that are employed (like in the CAP study) then the market is pretty good. You yourself have even stated this as a fact. If we gauge it by the revenue pathologists take in compared to how they did in the past, or volume of cases reviewed as a function of time, then the market is bad and oversaturated. To this, however, I would say that you cannot look at pathologists in isolation. Go out and speak to other specialties and you will see similar trends in most fields.

If the issue is that jobs are had by word-of-mouth and not by internet searches, and that they are now hiring 315 primary care docs in your town but you only see one ad for a pathology job and they want someone with Cyto, Derm, and Heme fellowships, then I can tell you it probably has always been that way and always will.

However, I will give my own anecdote, albeit my job path has not been typical when compared to most out there. I am not in academics. I only did one fellowship. I trained at a top program. I had lots of offers after a short stint at my home institution as Instructor. I get recruiters calling and emailing me fairly frequently (about once per month). I unfortunately talked to a few locums folks last year as I was between jobs and I hear from them all the time as well (this gets annoying). So it is not all bad for everyone.

 

[Med Director New England]

Again this...
I will post one positive thing in the job market in my area. There is fairly good demand for paths to cross over into bio-pharma / tech and leave clinical medicine all together. So if you get sick of it all you can always do that.

In fact I say with confidence there are currently more good industry jobs needing pathologists in and around Boston than there are good non-academic jobs (traditional path jobs / non industry) in all of New England. But these industry jobs would only be looking for experienced paths who have some experience in lab oversight so recent grads are still stuck cycling fellowships until they find an entry level academic job in New England.

group - maybe try to focus on anything new in this discussion we have had it so many times now..

Hopefully some current fellow(s) (anywhere) will chime in

 

[MetroPath]

I am a current fellow. I know another fellow who got a job via pathoutlines. He was not geographically restricted. I know another fellow who secured an academic job at my institution. I know one fellow who is doing a second fellowship.

I don’t know many people who did one fellowship, except the forensic peeps. One guy I know did cyto only but he was the only one.

There are jobs out there but you can’t be geographically restricted.

I applied to postings on pathoutlines and I didn’t get any responses from several postings. I think some practices look for people who are from the area and not just someone looking to find a job who will bail later. I did get a call from Quest and a practice in a city far away from my hometown. You will apply to jobs and never hear back.

I’d rather not move but I may have to move to some place I wouldn’t be happy living in just to secure a job. I’m a single dude btw.

I have friends who changed jobs after their first. I think that may be something I will do in a few years to secure a more desirable location.

 

[Allegri]

I would love to hear more about what these jobs in the pharmaceutical industry are like. How removed is the work from the practice of interpreting histopathology? Can one return to clinical work after several years in pharma or would employers balk at all that time spent out of clinical practice? What is the pay like?

 

[deleted314957]

Pathology has the second worst job market in medicine.
Nuclear medicine has the worst job market.

"The issue of what may constitute optimal train-
ing pathways for nuclear medicine and molecular
imaging has been of major interest and discussion
over the past decade (1–7). The underlying reasons
for these efforts are multifactorial but include the
evolving landscape for clinical nuclear medicine
practice, such as introduction and rapid adoption of
multimodality imaging; development of novel in-
strumentation, radiopharmaceuticals, and
theranostics; and the realities of overall poor pro-
spects in the job market for those physicians trained
only in nuclear medicine (NM) without certification
in diagnostic radiology (DR)."

http://snmmi.files.cms-plus.com/news/ptfnm_report_for_web.pdf

I am a current fellow. I know another fellow who got a job via pathoutlines. He was not geographically restricted. I know another fellow who secured an academic job at my institution. I know one fellow who is doing a second fellowship.

I don’t know many people who did one fellowship, except the forensic peeps. One guy I know did cyto only but he was the only one.

There are jobs out there but you can’t be geographically restricted.

I applied to postings on pathoutlines and I didn’t get any responses from several postings. I think some practices look for people who are from the area and not just someone looking to find a job who will bail later. I did get a call from Quest and a practice in a city far away from my hometown. You will apply to jobs and never hear back.

I’d rather not move but I may have to move to some place I wouldn’t be happy living in just to secure a job. I’m a single dude btw.

I have friends who changed jobs after their first. I think that may be something I will do in a few years to secure a more desirable location.

QED. You will not hear a similar story from a resident in a primary care or surgical field.

 

[MetroPath]

Yes I agree Mike.

 

[Unty]

What I hear from you is "get ready to dismiss any dissenting opinion."

The issue here is that a Locums person tells you something, which aligns with your own beliefs, so it is true. However, when others have a different view, or even published studies looking at a lot more data that disagrees with you or others who frequent these forums, it is biased or worse, it is propaganda put out by CAP, who not only seems to control everything, but is set on destroying pathology practice.

Look, I won't bother to argue with your premise. I have said before that the market is a complex thing with more than that one variable causing mischief. Practicing pathology is not the same today as it was 20 years ago, and it will be even more different in another 20. The quality and quantity of the market is shaded depending on your perception of what "good" is. If we gauge the market by the % of pathologists that are employed (like in the CAP study) then the market is pretty good. You yourself have even stated this as a fact. If we gauge it by the revenue pathologists take in compared to how they did in the past, or volume of cases reviewed as a function of time, then the market is bad and oversaturated. To this, however, I would say that you cannot look at pathologists in isolation. Go out and speak to other specialties and you will see similar trends in most fields.

If the issue is that jobs are had by word-of-mouth and not by internet searches, and that they are now hiring 315 primary care docs in your town but you only see one ad for a pathology job and they want someone with Cyto, Derm, and Heme fellowships, then I can tell you it probably has always been that way and always will.

However, I will give my own anecdote, albeit my job path has not been typical when compared to most out there. I am not in academics. I only did one fellowship. I trained at a top program. I had lots of offers after a short stint at my home institution as Instructor. I get recruiters calling and emailing me fairly frequently (about once per month). I unfortunately talked to a few locums folks last year as I was between jobs and I hear from them all the time as well (this gets annoying). So it is not all bad for everyone.

Maybe the issue is you were at a good surgical pathology institution as an instructor getting signout experience. Might be a good idea to some of us who can’t get a job in a particular region you’d like to live, work as an instructor for a year at a good institution for lower pay until something comes up.

Your marketability in the job market goes up with more signout experience.

I had recruiters email me but all the jobs are in places where I’d rather not live. Like I said there are jobs out there but limited in number.

One I received yesterday was for a whopping seven jobs, four of which I’m not qualified for. So that leaves me with 3 whopping jobs!!!! These jobs are from the whole country. Is it really that hard to understand?

The number of jobs I’ve been getting from recruiter emails range from 3-7. That’s pretty sad if you ask me.

The subject of this email was “Pathology positions across the US”.

 

[Unty]

7 jobs from another website. All require 3-8 years post fellowship experience. Had a friend tell me to stay away from HCA.

Oh there’s a job in Minn. oh wait it’s for pediatric pathology. So no jobs unless you want to work for HCA and have at least 3 years experience OR you are a pediatric pathologist.

Gbwillner feel free to post your emails from recruiters.ill be waiting.

 

[gbwillner]

Maybe the issue is you were at a good surgical pathology institution as an instructor getting signout experience. Might be a good idea to some of us who can’t get a job in a particular region you’d like to live, work as an instructor for a year at a good institution for lower pay until something comes up.

Your marketability in the job market goes up with more signout experience.

I had recruiters email me but all the jobs are in places where I’d rather not live. Like I said there are jobs out there but limited in number.

One I received yesterday was for a whopping seven jobs, four of which I’m not qualified for. So that leaves me with 3 whopping jobs!!!! These jobs are from the whole country. Is it really that hard to understand?

The number of jobs I’ve been getting from recruiter emails range from 3-7. That’s pretty sad if you ask me.

Again, this is a niche market. When I got lots of offers out of my home institution, all required relocation. All of them. I suppose one difference may be that I expected to have to move, knowing that in my immediate area there was not going to be a job I wanted. So I guess I did not consider that a negative.

I will also say that "a recruiter" does not have access to all the available jobs. They only have access to the jobs they are getting paid to fill. So this particular recruiter is being asked to help fill 7 pathology jobs across their region of operation, and you are qualified for 3. This is again not really saying anything about the broader market.

Speak to your Rad Onc colleagues, and see if moving is an expected part of their journey. You only need so many Rad Oncs per capita just like pathologists. You aren't OWED a job, you have to go where there is a need and demand. The more need, the higher you will likely be compensated for your efforts.

 

[Unty]

Again, this is a niche market. When I got lots of offers out of my home institution, all required relocation. All of them. I suppose one difference may be that I expected to have to move, knowing that in my immediate area there was not going to be a job I wanted. So I guess I did not consider that a negative.

I will also say that "a recruiter" does not have access to all the available jobs. They only have access to the jobs they are getting paid to fill. So this particular recruiter is being asked to help fill 7 pathology jobs across their region of operation, and you are qualified for 3. This is again not really saying anything about the broader market.

Speak to your Rad Onc colleagues, and see if moving is an expected part of their journey. You only need so many Rad Oncs per capita just like pathologists. You aren't OWED a job, you have to go where there is a need and demand. The more need, the higher you will likely be compensated for your efforts.

Yup radonc does not have a good job market currently either.

Med students considering pathology—with $200,000 or more worth of debt, you aren’t owed a job. Did you hear that? Just a FYI.

I mean statements like this are important for medical students considering Pathology to know. You aren’t owed a job. That’s hilarious.

No one in this world is owed anything but the field should provide you good job opportunities without having to relocate. That’s not the state of the current job market in pathology sadly. It’s a supply and demand issue. If you can tweak the number of residency spots (aka limiting the number of spots) opening more jobs, then residents would be able to get a job without having to move or having to do multiple fellowships.

The more need...you meaning the boondocks? Looks like I’ll be moving to the boondocks with Webb.

 

[gbwillner]

I would love to hear more about what these jobs in the pharmaceutical industry are like. How removed is the work from the practice of interpreting histopathology? Can one return to clinical work after several years in pharma or would employers balk at all that time spent out of clinical practice? What is the pay like?

In GENERAL, these jobs suck (IMHO).

In Pharma there are going to be a few, very different roles for Pathologists:

1. drug target discovery- this is part of a research division
2. clinical trial support/medical affairs- this is part of a clinical research division
3. management- this is usually lab directors for pathologists. Real management in Pharma tends to be clinicians with patient experience for some reason, although there is no real established rationale that I can find. You could be promoted to head of said research divisions as well.
4. adviser or promoter. OK, in these you are not really an employee but will be asked to review science for them and help guide their direction or help shill their wares.

From my experience, #1 and #2 can be rewarding if you really don't like patient care and love research but want to be outside the academic setting. You may get great benefits and equity, but in general, the pay sucks and is on par with academic salaries (or worse). You are an employee, and will soon see how non-doctors see work- 9-5 jobs with 2-3 weeks paid vacation.

#3 can be all over the place, but from my experience, unless you somehow get to a C-level position, your salary range is less than what most people here get in PP. Equity again can maybe make up for it, but not necessarily. These jobs involve working with marketing and sales, setting budgets, and maybe helping set the medical direction of the company.

#4 is nice because you are not an employee and it can all be a well-paying side-hustle. However, they won't take just anyone- you need to be a KOI (key opinion leader).

In my broad-sweeping generalization, the physicians who take these roles are the docs that A) lost their licenses and can't practice anymore, B) have bad communication skills or are otherwise unemployable in health care, or 3) Just don't want to practice medicine. If you like and want to continue to practice medicine, these jobs will not only be less satisfying for you, they will likely pay less.

 

[gbwillner]

In GENERAL, these jobs suck (IMHO).

In Pharma there are going to be a few, very different roles for Pathologists:

...

I forgot to answer the rest of the questions.

Some of the discovery research may be very different than surgical pathology. However, once drugs are developed and tested, some of these research jobs include reviewing hundreds or thousands of murine or other animal organs to look for histologic changes. So that is very similar. On the clinical trial side, you may act to review diagnoses or human pathology samples for histology to measure outcomes or adverse events. So there is a fair amount of surgical pathology involved, although often it is not a full workup or maybe not diagnostic.

 

[gbwillner]

Yup radonc does not have a good job market currently either.

Med students considering pathology—with $200,000 or more worth of debt, you aren’t owed a job. Did you hear that? Just a FYI.

I mean statements like this are important for medical students considering Pathology to know. You aren’t owed a job. That’s hilarious.

No one in this world is owed anything but the field should provide you good job opportunities without having to relocate. That’s not the state of the current job market in pathology sadly. It’s a supply and demand issue. If you can tweak the number of residency spots (aka limiting the number of spots) opening more jobs, then residents would be able to get a job without having to move or having to do multiple fellowships.

The more need...you meaning the boondocks? Looks like I’ll be moving to the boondocks with Webb.

In terms of your latter comment, in general yes. As you see other posters say to "go rural"- those jobs tend to pay more and have more autonomy and less chance to be affected by larger market forces like consolidation. Why would a large regional academic powerhouse or mega-group target your specific region for purchase in the middle of nowhere? now they will need to staff it and support it.

To your latter comment, just because you aren't owed a job doesn't mean there isn't one for you. It's more of a mindset. Go earn your place in the world- no one will just hand it to you.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Yup radonc does not have a good job market currently either.

Med students considering pathology—with $200,000 or more worth of debt, you aren’t owed a job. Did you hear that? Just a FYI.

I mean statements like this are important for medical students considering Pathology to know. You aren’t owed a job. That’s hilarious.

No one in this world is owed anything but the field should provide you good job opportunities without having to relocate. That’s not the state of the current job market in pathology sadly. It’s a supply and demand issue. If you can tweak the number of residency spots (aka limiting the number of spots) opening more jobs, then residents would be able to get a job without having to move or having to do multiple fellowships.

The more need...you meaning the boondocks? Looks like I’ll be moving to the boondocks with Webb.

Nothing wrong with the boondocks, especially this time of year. The leaves are changing. Everyday is a Bob Ross painting. Thinking about loading my squeeze into the Jeep Gladiator and heading to the corn maze.

Keep it rural.

 

[Med Director New England]

In GENERAL, these jobs suck (IMHO).

In Pharma there are going to be a few, very different roles for Pathologists:

1. drug target discovery- this is part of a research division
2. clinical trial support/medical affairs- this is part of a clinical research division
3. management- this is usually lab directors for pathologists. Real management in Pharma tends to be clinicians with patient experience for some reason, although there is no real established rationale that I can find. You could be promoted to head of said research divisions as well.
4. adviser or promoter. OK, in these you are not really an employee but will be asked to review science for them and help guide their direction or help shill their wares.

From my experience, #1 and #2 can be rewarding if you really don't like patient care and love research but want to be outside the academic setting. You may get great benefits and equity, but in general, the pay sucks and is on par with academic salaries (or worse). You are an employee, and will soon see how non-doctors see work- 9-5 jobs with 2-3 weeks paid vacation.

#3 can be all over the place, but from my experience, unless you somehow get to a C-level position, your salary range is less than what most people here get in PP. Equity again can maybe make up for it, but not necessarily. These jobs involve working with marketing and sales, setting budgets, and maybe helping set the medical direction of the company.

#4 is nice because you are not an employee and it can all be a well-paying side-hustle. However, they won't take just anyone- you need to be a KOI (key opinion leader).

In my broad-sweeping generalization, the physicians who take these roles are the docs that A) lost their licenses and can't practice anymore, B) have bad communication skills or are otherwise unemployable in health care, or 3) Just don't want to practice medicine. If you like and want to continue to practice medicine, these jobs will not only be less satisfying for you, they will likely pay less.

Why in your opinion do jobs in industry / pharma suck?
&
Why do you think paths who take these jobs have the characteristics you mention? Why would anyone, even in a non clinical setting, want a path who was so crappy they lost their license?

I don’t have first hand experience nor do I have a close friend who has crossed over so I don’t know for sure.

the two that I know who did cross over we’re both / still are great pathologists, both trained at elite places, effective communicators and were in no way desperate. neither have come back to traditional practice. I did get a call on one as a reference and the pharma company asked me a lot about the path’s communication and people management skills b/c they highly valued both.

I have no idea about the comp but at least pharma/ industry employers of paths increase the demand side of the equation- so it cant hurt and can only help the job market.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

In GENERAL, these jobs suck (IMHO).

In Pharma there are going to be a few, very different roles for Pathologists:

1. drug target discovery- this is part of a research division
2. clinical trial support/medical affairs- this is part of a clinical research division
3. management- this is usually lab directors for pathologists. Real management in Pharma tends to be clinicians with patient experience for some reason, although there is no real established rationale that I can find. You could be promoted to head of said research divisions as well.
4. adviser or promoter. OK, in these you are not really an employee but will be asked to review science for them and help guide their direction or help shill their wares.

From my experience, #1 and #2 can be rewarding if you really don't like patient care and love research but want to be outside the academic setting. You may get great benefits and equity, but in general, the pay sucks and is on par with academic salaries (or worse). You are an employee, and will soon see how non-doctors see work- 9-5 jobs with 2-3 weeks paid vacation.

#3 can be all over the place, but from my experience, unless you somehow get to a C-level position, your salary range is less than what most people here get in PP. Equity again can maybe make up for it, but not necessarily. These jobs involve working with marketing and sales, setting budgets, and maybe helping set the medical direction of the company.

#4 is nice because you are not an employee and it can all be a well-paying side-hustle. However, they won't take just anyone- you need to be a KOI (key opinion leader).

In my broad-sweeping generalization, the physicians who take these roles are the docs that A) lost their licenses and can't practice anymore, B) have bad communication skills or are otherwise unemployable in health care, or 3) Just don't want to practice medicine. If you like and want to continue to practice medicine, these jobs will not only be less satisfying for you, they will likely pay less.

The pathologists I know that worked pharma did it as a side gig. They were good pathologists.

If you want ancillary income, open a doggy daycare, vape shop, or something.

 

[Unty]

The pathologists I know that worked pharma did it as a side gig. They were good pathologists.

If you want ancillary income, open a doggy daycare, vape shop, or something.

Doctors show how vaping damages lungs, as the number of illnesses continues to rise

 

[gbwillner]

Why in your opinion do jobs in industry / pharma suck?

I don’t have first hand experience nor do I have a close friend who has crossed over so I don’t know for sure.

the two that I know who did cross over we’re both / still are great pathologists, both trained at elite places, effective communicators and were in no way desperate. neither have come back to traditional practice. I did get a call on one as a reference and the pharma company asked me a lot about the path’s communication and people management skills b/c they highly valued both.

I have no idea about the comp but at least pharma/ industry employers of paths increase the demand side of the equation- so it cant hurt and can only help the job market.

Of course I was speaking in general terms. Anyone in a management position (likely where a seasoned pathologist would go) would require communication skills. Also, working as an adviser or contractor is also a good gig as I mentioned. But in general, for many of these positions, I feel many of the employees are seen as necessary parts of a machinery that are easily replaceable and not demanding of particular autonomy or seen as particularly vital to company success.

From the positions I have been offered, in industry or pharma, these jobs start around $200K at the "director" level and hit a cap very close to that (maybe $250-275). It's a different mindset for many of these companies that "directors" of research, med affairs, marketing, sales all make about the same. It's what a "director" makes. Sometimes this number is way out of line with what a physician practicing medicine makes, particularly for the experience required for such a role. Thus, those that choose these jobs do so because better options are not available.

 

[path_spouse]

Of course I was speaking in general terms. Anyone in a management position (likely where a seasoned pathologist would go) would require communication skills. Also, working as an adviser or contractor is also a good gig as I mentioned. But in general, for many of these positions, I feel many of the employees are seen as necessary parts of a machinery that are easily replaceable and not demanding of particular autonomy or seen as particularly vital to company success.

From the positions I have been offered, in industry or pharma, these jobs start around $200K at the "director" level and hit a cap very close to that (maybe $250-275). It's a different mindset for many of these companies that "directors" of research, med affairs, marketing, sales all make about the same. It's what a "director" makes. Sometimes this number is way out of line with what a physician practicing medicine makes, particularly for the experience required for such a role. Thus, those that choose these jobs do so because better options are not available.

I am a PhD scientist (and pathologist spouse). I am in a research/medical affairs role similar to what gbwillner has described. We employ some MDs, though not pathologists.

As far as such jobs being Plan B if better options aren't available--sometimes Plan A isn't all that great. I live in a city like Cambridge, MA or Palo Alto where industry jobs abound, but where pathology openings are scarce, the competition for them is fierce--and after all that competition, the jobs are exploitative and quality of life is poor. I know three (!) pathologists who are geographically pinned here, spent a few years working in the sorts of churn n' burn jobs that are common locally, and ultimately left for industry and seem happy. All three are nice people, good communicators, and trained at strong institutions.

In my broad-sweeping generalization, the physicians who take these roles are the docs that A) lost their licenses and can't practice anymore, B) have bad communication skills or are otherwise unemployable in health care, or 3) Just don't want to practice medicine.

I have met many non-clinical physicians, and also been involved in hiring some. The ones I've met are C) foreign physicians who do not want to do a US residency, D) geographically restricted, or E) approaching retirement age and ready for a quieter life. I have not met anyone who lost their license or seemed unemployable.

I do agree that for the most part, industry and federal jobs pay much less than private practice. The jobs are also very different from practicing medicine.

As far as pharma/industry as a "side gig," in my experience, you need to be a well-known academic first. At that point, companies will sponsor your research, and also pay you for giving talks about their product, or sometimes consulting.

 

[Unty]

I am a PhD scientist (and pathologist spouse). I am in a research/medical affairs role similar to what gbwillner has described. We employ some MDs, though not pathologists.

As far as such jobs being Plan B if better options aren't available--sometimes Plan A isn't all that great. I live in a city like Cambridge, MA or Palo Alto where industry jobs abound, but where pathology openings are scarce, the competition for them is fierce--and after all that competition, the jobs are exploitative and quality of life is poor. I know three (!) pathologists who are geographically pinned here, spent a few years working in the sorts of churn n' burn jobs that are common locally, and ultimately left for industry and seem happy. All three are nice people, good communicators, and trained at strong institutions.



I have met many non-clinical physicians, and also been involved in hiring some. The ones I've met are C) foreign physicians who do not want to do a US residency, D) geographically restricted, or E) approaching retirement age and ready for a quieter life. I have not met anyone who lost their license or seemed unemployable.

I do agree that for the most part, industry and federal jobs pay much less than private practice. The jobs are also very different from practicing medicine.

Yup and CAP data puts out data like the job market is good but does not portray a so called rosy job market like in the NE as is mentioned here.

Do you think CAP would say in their journal that jobs are hard to come by in the NE such as cities in Boston?

With all those graduates being pumped out each year I wonder where they all go.

I mention tight job markets and I get people like yaah saying it’s all hearsay and assumptions.

Sometimes you just want to shake ppls heads around here. Some people are clueless and try to say things are good when they are not in particular regions of this country.

Thanks for sharing your story.

 

[Med Director New England]

I am a PhD scientist (and pathologist spouse). I am in a research/medical affairs role similar to what gbwillner has described. We employ some MDs, though not pathologists.

As far as such jobs being Plan B if better options aren't available--sometimes Plan A isn't all that great. I live in a city like Cambridge, MA or Palo Alto where industry jobs abound, but where pathology openings are scarce, the competition for them is fierce--and after all that competition, the jobs are exploitative and quality of life is poor. I know three (!) pathologists who are geographically pinned here, spent a few years working in the sorts of churn n' burn jobs that are common locally, and ultimately left for industry and seem happy. All three are nice people, good communicators, and trained at strong institutions.



I have met many non-clinical physicians, and also been involved in hiring some. The ones I've met are C) foreign physicians who do not want to do a US residency, D) geographically restricted, or E) approaching retirement age and ready for a quieter life. I have not met anyone who lost their license or seemed unemployable.

I do agree that for the most part, industry and federal jobs pay much less than private practice. The jobs are also very different from practicing medicine.

As far as pharma/industry as a "side gig," in my experience, you need to be a well-known academic first. At that point, companies will sponsor your research, and also pay you for giving talks about their product, or sometimes consulting.

Agree thx for sharing this.
To clarify - fierce completion, churn and burn are you referring to traditional path jobs? Or this in pharma?
Thx again

 

[Med Director New England]

Of course I was speaking in general terms. Anyone in a management position (likely where a seasoned pathologist would go) would require communication skills. Also, working as an adviser or contractor is also a good gig as I mentioned. But in general, for many of these positions, I feel many of the employees are seen as necessary parts of a machinery that are easily replaceable and not demanding of particular autonomy or seen as particularly vital to company success.

From the positions I have been offered, in industry or pharma, these jobs start around $200K at the "director" level and hit a cap very close to that (maybe $250-275). It's a different mindset for many of these companies that "directors" of research, med affairs, marketing, sales all make about the same. It's what a "director" makes. Sometimes this number is way out of line with what a physician practicing medicine makes, particularly for the experience required for such a role. Thus, those that choose these jobs do so because better options are not available.

I don’t know for sure but I believe your #’s for salary in pharma/tech are probably low. The two I know of definitely would not have left for 200k and probably not even 250

also if your new boss reports to the chief medical officer or chief research officer of a Fortune 500 company (i.e with hard work and 2 promotions that could be you) - I would imagine the salaries in pharma have potential to be quite high.

 

[Unty]

I guess from this slide from the Boston (so ironic) meeting for the pathology program coordinators we are spreading misinformation about pathology.

 

[gbwillner]

I am a PhD scientist (and pathologist spouse). I am in a research/medical affairs role similar to what gbwillner has described. We employ some MDs, though not pathologists.

As far as such jobs being Plan B if better options aren't available--sometimes Plan A isn't all that great. I live in a city like Cambridge, MA or Palo Alto where industry jobs abound, but where pathology openings are scarce, the competition for them is fierce--and after all that competition, the jobs are exploitative and quality of life is poor. I know three (!) pathologists who are geographically pinned here, spent a few years working in the sorts of churn n' burn jobs that are common locally, and ultimately left for industry and seem happy. All three are nice people, good communicators, and trained at strong institutions.



I have met many non-clinical physicians, and also been involved in hiring some. The ones I've met are C) foreign physicians who do not want to do a US residency, D) geographically restricted, or E) approaching retirement age and ready for a quieter life. I have not met anyone who lost their license or seemed unemployable.

I do agree that for the most part, industry and federal jobs pay much less than private practice. The jobs are also very different from practicing medicine.

As far as pharma/industry as a "side gig," in my experience, you need to be a well-known academic first. At that point, companies will sponsor your research, and also pay you for giving talks about their product, or sometimes consulting.

You are right that a large contingent are foreign MDs, many of whom never did or do not want to do a residency. There are also some who are US MD/PhDs who never completed residency.

 

[gbwillner]

I don’t know for sure but I believe your #’s for salary in pharma/tech are probably low. The two I know of definitely would not have left for 200k and probably not even 250

also if your new boss reports to the chief medical officer or chief research officer of a Fortune 500 company (i.e with hard work and 2 promotions that could be you) - I would imagine the salaries in pharma have potential to be quite high.

I have interviewed for and been offered dozens of jobs in industry and pharma and not only have been in industry for the last 6 years, but also hold positions on boards of several drug companies, so take my words with a grain of salt.

One thing to point out regarding salary is that industry is big, but the specific ask here was for Pharma. Biotech is also on the same salary spectrum and actually may have even lower salaries, depending on the company and where it is in the funding and revenue cycle. Some biotech offers I have received were lower than academic salaries.

Another part of industry that we have not talked about but is more relevant to pathology are diagnostics companies and large commercial labs. Those companies require competent pathologists and pay them well in director and higher roles. These companies typically already have revenue and are a bit more stable. The highest salary offers I have had were from these companies, which are on par or higher than private practice salaries. But again, these are not Pharma.

Regarding CMOs- as I said, C-level positions can pay a lot, especially in profitable companies. But director level- there could be 20 directors at a large company.

 

[path_spouse]

Agree thx for sharing this.
To clarify - fierce completion, churn and burn are you referring to traditional path jobs? Or this in pharma?
Thx again

Oh, I am referring to traditional pathology jobs. We live in a desirable city where traditional pathology jobs are very hard to find. It’s an employer’s market, and when my husband was job hunting there seemed to be a lot of what I’d call “churn n’ burn” jobs, in which a series of junior people had stayed 2-3 years and moved on because their quality of life was poor.

If you are geographically restricted to cities like ours, with a strong tech or pharma industry presence and not many traditional pathology jobs, I think industry is not a terrible option. You can probably live where you need to, have a decent work-life balance, go home at 5 pm, and be greatly respected.

But no, tech at least doesn’t pay like private practice pathology (I don’t know about pharma...sounds like gbwillner knows more) and the jobs may not be what you spent many years training to do. The salary estimates gbwillner gives are in line with my own understanding of what we pay our MD’s—though in addition to the base pay, there can be a sizable annual bonus.

 

[Unty]

Give me a flipping break. I post my experience, you dismiss it or grudgingly acknowledge it might be true but only for my specific circumstances. My experiences are not hearsay nor are they assumptions. I question your anecdotes, ask for more information instead of blindingly accepting something that doesn't fit my experience, and that's a problem. OK, got it. All I have talked about is my own experience. I do not dismiss the experiences of others, I merely seek to clarify and understand WTF is the difference is between my circumstance and that of others, which is widely disparate. You continue to move the goalposts. If you want to talk about the job market in the northeast, go ahead. We already discussed it and for Chicago, I have no reason to doubt anyone's negative experiences with it. I do not live currently in Chicago or the Northeast. I have no current experience with those. You can be the expert there. I have no reason to doubt the job market is terrible there. Continue to feed your own biases, just stop putting words in my mouth because my anecdotes don't fit your opinions.

Since our group has essentially completed our big round of hiring (8 paths in 3-4 years) as our very own retirement cliff happened, we won't be looking for anyone new hopefully for a long time now, which you can now use as evidence that the job market is bad where I am. Next time we need someone I'll be sure to ask you guys here to easily find me 10 outstanding candidates.

For what it's worth, I am not disputing that the pathology job market is "tight" (or whatever word you want to use). It's a small field. There are some legitimate reasons for it and some problematic reasons for it. If we wanted to hire just anyone, we probably could.

For a bunch of pathologists you guys sure don't understand nuance very well.

How about looking for some good candidates that your group likes, who you can work with and who is willing to go the extra mile for your group? Someone who your group can take on, who won’t be a problem for your group and can continue to learn on the job. Some who comes into your group as a good candidate and over the years you groom him or her into an outstanding pathologist?

Why do you need excellent or outstanding candidates? Maybe if you bring the bar down a little you won’t have such a hard time finding people.

Read a post from Gary Vaynerchuk that made me think about you:

“When you scale a business, there are usually only two things holding you back:

1. Your inability to operate, or
2. Your ego.

For a surprising number of people, it’s their ego.

Business owners set their own level of talent as a basis of hiring for their employees — and then complain that they can’t find any “good” employees.

It’s a fun game to play. You set an arbitrary benchmark that nobody’s hitting because you put yourself on the pedestal,.

But it comes at the mercy of building a bigger business. If your impression of them as an employee is based on some interpretation of how you decide they model your behavior, you’re just scratching your own itch of how great you are.

People think I play on ego, but in reality I play on confidence. It’s what allows me to scale. I don’t hold anybody to an arbitrary metric that has no reality other than what’s playing in my own head.

I’m not holding people to some fake Mendoza line that I’m the judge and the jury of.

It’s the reason I have 700+ employees with high retention. I don’t hold them to my standard because they don’t need to be me.”

 

[gbwillner]

Oh, I am referring to traditional pathology jobs. We live in a desirable city where traditional pathology jobs are very hard to find. It’s an employer’s market, and when my husband was job hunting there seemed to be a lot of what I’d call “churn n’ burn” jobs, in which a series of junior people had stayed 2-3 years and moved on because their quality of life was poor.

If you are geographically restricted to cities like ours, with a strong tech or pharma industry presence and not many traditional pathology jobs, I think industry is not a terrible option. You can probably live where you need to, have a decent work-life balance, go home at 5 pm, and be greatly respected.

But no, tech at least doesn’t pay like private practice pathology (I don’t know about pharma...sounds like gbwillner knows more) and the jobs may not be what you spent many years training to do. The salary estimates gbwillner gives are in line with my own understanding of what we pay our MD’s—though in addition to the base pay, there can be a sizable annual bonus.

I would add to this that, completely independent of pathology markets, Boston and San Francisco are the biotech hubs in the united states, and probably contain more that 50% of all this business. This means that there may be additional opportunities for physicians here outside of traditional practice that are not available to other regions.

I am not sure how this could be painted as a negative for the market.

 

[Med Director New England]

I am not sure how this could be painted as a negative for the market.

who said this is negative for the market?

 

[deleted314957]

How about looking for some good candidates that your group likes, who you can work with and who is willing to go the extra mile for your group? Someone who your group can take on, who won’t be a problem for your group and can continue to learn on the job. Some who comes into your group as a good candidate and over the years you groom him or her into an outstanding pathologist?

Why do you need excellent or outstanding candidates? Maybe if you bring the bar down a little you won’t have such a hard time finding people.

Read a post from Gary Vaynerchuk that made me think about you:

“When you scale a business, there are usually only two things holding you back:

1. Your inability to operate, or
2. Your ego.

For a surprising number of people, it’s their ego.

Business owners set their own level of talent as a basis of hiring for their employees — and then complain that they can’t find any “good” employees.

It’s a fun game to play. You set an arbitrary benchmark that nobody’s hitting because you put yourself on the pedestal,.

But it comes at the mercy of building a bigger business. If your impression of them as an employee is based on some interpretation of how you decide they model your behavior, you’re just scratching your own itch of how great you are.

People think I play on ego, but in reality I play on confidence. It’s what allows me to scale. I don’t hold anybody to an arbitrary metric that has no reality other than what’s playing in my own head.

I’m not holding people to some fake Mendoza line that I’m the judge and the jury of.

It’s the reason I have 700+ employees with high retention. I don’t hold them to my standard because they don’t need to be me.”

Well, in a “hirerer’s market I would most certainly hold out for impressive, excellent candidates rather than candidates who seem “good” in comparison. Why not?

 

[y2k_free_radical]

I would add to this that, completely independent of pathology markets, Boston and San Francisco are the biotech hubs in the united states, and probably contain more that 50% of all this business. This means that there may be additional opportunities for physicians here outside of traditional practice that are not available to other regions.

I am not sure how this could be painted as a negative for the market.

Actually,RALEIGH-DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL bounded RESEARCH TRIANGLE has or had the most PHD's per square mile with many in biotech

 

[gbwillner]

Actually,RALEIGH-DURHAM-CHAPEL HILL bounded RESEARCH TRIANGLE has or had the most PHD's per square mile with many in biotech

Yup, that is true. San Diego is also a big hub right now. But neither hold a candle to San Francisco or Boston.

 

[yaah]

We have high standards and high expectations. Not going to compromise on that, we've been burned before. We do hire young people (new grads) who don't have great experience yet, but we feel can grow into certain roles. So that sort of applies to your suggestion. It's interesting that you mention ego - that is definitely something that has to be watched in new/long term hires. Confidence and desire to succeed and go the extra mile are one thing - but the other part of ego is thinking you work harder than everyone else. That can be poison to an otherwise effective group who tries to equitably distribute roles.

You do not want to hire
1) People who don't really want to be here, but are looking for different jobs in other parts of the country
2) People who don't work well as members of teams
3) People who do not have sufficient diagnostic skills and variable skills to function as an effective member of our group.

Our group is not for everyone - that's not a bad thing. Some people have turned us down because they think they found a job elsewhere that isn't as strenuous. That's fine for them, and good for us because they may not be a good fit. We are not going to overhire.

 

[BU Pathology]

I just posted the "cold call" emails where recruiters are looking for pathologists in the Open Positions sticky thread.

Open positions

Assistant, Associate or Full Professor (HS Clinical, Clinical X) Hematopathology University of California, San Diego The Department of Pathology at the University of California, San Diego (http://pathology.ucsd.edu) is committed to academic excellence and diversity within the faculty, staff...

forums.studentdoctor.net

These positions are from the unsolicited emails regularly sent to me by recruiting firms.

One of these positions is in Monterey CA. I spent 9 months stationed at the Presidio and views, weather and attractions are very nice.

 

[deleted642280]

The next article should actually be about cutting the number of residency slots to improve this so called tight job market which has been relayed to me by recruiters.

Big labs employing pathologists from an oversupplied market.

Pathology has the worst job market in medicine? Anyone can name another field with a worse job market?

This post from reddit explains it all:

View attachment 284904


Let me translate this: I have no clinical pathology experience. I need someone to tell me how can I impress the people interviewing me.

Too many residency spots opens the floodgates to candidates like this. Random applicants with no pathology rotations just looking to get a spot somewhere.

Yes--I agree the market is saturated because of too many residency spots. I think academic programs need more PAs, not more residents if they need more grossing help.

 

[Unty]

It’s the number of programs out there that rely on resident cheap labor. I think there are programs out there that should not have a pathology residency program although I admit, some do train residents adequately and have the volume to train residents. They rely on resident labor to save money aka costs.

There are programs out there that shouldn’t even have a residency program (less than 15-20,000 surgicals a year), little teaching, no unknowns sessions, weak didactics, attendings who aren’t enthusiastic or interested in teaching, lack of expertise, programs run by private practice pathologists, etc.

One program I’m familiar (800+ bed community hospital) with has a volume of approx 26,000 surgicals with three residents per year and three surgical pathology fellows. They have 4 PAs. Then there is a large academic program with 60-70,000 surgicals with four residents (similar number of residents) per year and more than 4 PAs. Do you see the discrepancy here? They both have a similar number of residents but the community hospital has a much lower volume.

The latter saves money by getting cheap labor aka residents and surgpath fellows to gross. The academic hospital although it has a similar number of residents hires more PAs to help with the workload. They can because they have $$$$.

It’s not necessarily that academic programs should hire more PAs it’s that there are too many programs (community hospitals) that rely on resident cheap labor to help their bottom line. Academic institutions also play a role in this as well.

If you were in charge of a business, would you hire more PAs for $100,000 a pop or a resident/fellow at $50,000-$60,000 or so?

The busy community hospital im alluding to can hire all PAs to do the work and not even have a residency program but they found a cheaper way of doing things (aka hiring residents and fellows) instead of dishing out money for more PAs. They got the ACGME or whoever approves residency programs to allow them to have a residency program and hence saves them a lot of money over the long term.

These residents get pushed out into this so called rosy job market and the cycle continues.

When it comes down to it, cash is king and if you can save more money by hiring a cheaper alternative to PAs why wouldn’t you?

 

[Spikebd]

Probably more likely is that places like Labcorp, Quest, and Ameripath love getting physicians (skewed towards IMGs) who are willing to take a $100,000 to $200,000 pay cut (since they likely have no student loans).
The slide mills likely conspire with academia to keep the spots full. These IMGs are often times very sharp individuals, but I’d argue it’s an unfair setup for the physician who trained via the traditional American pathway where we pay for school.

 

[Spikebd]

If consolidation in healthcare keeps going maybe Labcorp and Quest will eventually be forced to shut down their AP diagnostic services. The big regional healthcare entities can surely team up with pathologists to keep all AP in house, including the biopsies and easy stuff. These slides mills are a filthy way to perform healthcare.

 

[gbwillner]

Gbwillner feel free to post your emails from recruiters.ill be waiting.

Unty,
I just realized you specifically asked me to post emails from recruiters. I am not sure why you are asking, unless you for some reason think I am making things up. Not sure why I would do that, but I guess if everything is a conspiracy these days, I guess it makes sense that CAP and BIG ACADEMIA are paying me big bucks to lie on an internet forum.

BTW, most of the time it is not emails but unsolicited phone calls to my personal phone (particularly for Locums work, which is why I find it annoying).

Here is an email from last week:

"Hi XXXX,

I hope this message finds you well.

We recently launched a Medical Director search with our clients in upstate NY specializing in... [my area of expertise]. They just announced their CMO is planning to dedicate more of his time on research.

Given your expertise... , I thought I would reach out to see if you might be interested in speaking with me about the role.

I attached a position description for you.

Please let me know your thoughts on discussing more details.

Best regards,
XXXX"


Here is one from 2 weeks ago:

Courtesy of LinkedIn:

"Hi, thanks for the connect! Looking to hire a medical director in the Oregon area. Paid relocation is being offered. Are you interested in a new opportunity? "

Here is another, from 4 weeks ago:

"I am reaching out because I am currently representing a commercial stage, privately held biopharma seeking a Sr. Medical Director- Clinical Development to lead its ongoing rare disease portfolio. Are you free later today for a brief chat? I'd like to discuss this role with you and how I may be in a position to support- either now or in the future. Thanks, XXXX"

I might have undershot the number of requests I get.
Or, I guess I may have just made all these up since CAP is paying me the big bucks.

 

[Unty]

No I believe

Unty,
I just realized you specifically asked me to post emails from recruiters. I am not sure why you are asking, unless you for some reason think I am making things up. Not sure why I would do that, but I guess if everything is a conspiracy these days, I guess it makes sense that CAP and BIG ACADEMIA are paying me big bucks to lie on an internet forum.

BTW, most of the time it is not emails but unsolicited phone calls to my personal phone (particularly for Locums work, which is why I find it annoying).

Here is an email from last week:

"Hi XXXX,

I hope this message finds you well.

We recently launched a Medical Director search with our clients in upstate NY specializing in... [my area of expertise]. They just announced their CMO is planning to dedicate more of his time on research.

Given your expertise... , I thought I would reach out to see if you might be interested in speaking with me about the role.

I attached a position description for you.

Please let me know your thoughts on discussing more details.

Best regards,
XXXX"


Here is one from 2 weeks ago:

Courtesy of LinkedIn:

"Hi, thanks for the connect! Looking to hire a medical director in the Oregon area. Paid relocation is being offered. Are you interested in a new opportunity? "

Here is another, from 4 weeks ago:

"I am reaching out because I am currently representing a commercial stage, privately held biopharma seeking a Sr. Medical Director- Clinical Development to lead its ongoing rare disease portfolio. Are you free later today for a brief chat? I'd like to discuss this role with you and how I may be in a position to support- either now or in the future. Thanks, XXXX"

I might have undershot the number of requests I get.
Or, I guess I may have just made all these up since CAP is paying me the big bucks.

No I believe you. The thing is these jobs are medical director jobs not someone who is fresh out of fellowship can undertake or some may not be willing to undertake. The last job is for biopharm which most people who want to do diagnostic pathology are NOT interested in.

I’m seeing similar posts. Jobs scattered across the country which someone may not be eligible for because they do t have a particular fellowship or job ads for pathologists looking for 3-8 years of experience, obviously not for a fresh grad.

The thing is there are jobs scattered across this country but be ready to move if you have to. That’s why I think the market is not optimal and why I continue to preach the market is tight moreso in certain regions if the country.

You have signout experience so it increases your chances of getting a job. For fresh grads that first job may be hard to find.

I wanted to see the emails you have been getting and if it’s similar to what I’ve been getting. I also wanted to see the type of jobs offered and basically from those emails you posted they aren’t applicable to new grads out of fellowship.

 

[gbwillner]

No I believe


No I believe you. The thing is these jobs are medical director jobs not someone who is fresh out of fellowship can undertake or some may not be willing to undertake. The last job is for biopharm which most people who want to do diagnostic pathology are NOT interested in.

I’m seeing similar posts. Jobs scattered across the country which someone may not be eligible for because they do t have a particular fellowship or job ads for pathologists looking for 3-8 years of experience, obviously not for a fresh grad.

The thing is there are jobs scattered across this country but be ready to move if you have to. That’s why I think the market is not optimal and why I continue to preach the market is tight moreso in certain regions if the country.

You have signout experience so it increases your chances of getting a job. For fresh grads that first job may be hard to find.

I wanted to see the emails you have been getting and if it’s similar to what I’ve been getting. I also wanted to see the type of jobs offered and basically from those emails you posted they aren’t applicable to new grads out of fellowship.

Unty,
I am not a new grad out of training so I am not sure why you would have expected me to receive those kinds of offers. I have been a medical director and in industry, so these jobs make sense for someone like me. I had to redact some of the info because these were specifically addressed to me and my experience.

I do also get general surgpath offers, but these are not as common for me because my focus is elsewhere.

 

[Unty]

Unty,
I am not a new grad out of training so I am not sure why you would have expected me to receive those kinds of offers. I have been a medical director and in industry, so these jobs make sense for someone like me. I had to redact some of the info because these were specifically addressed to me and my experience.

I do also get general surgpath offers, but these are not as common for me because my focus is elsewhere.

I wanted to see the offers you were getting. Yes you are a medical director so I’d expect you to get those emails. If you have any offers relevant to someone fresh out of fellowship, please post. I get some job ads from recruiters that may be applicable to new grads but not many overall.

 

[MetroPath]

I have been applying to different jobs online across the country. Like yaah mentioned I get the feel that employers are looking for people with local ties or who won’t leave within a few years.

The issue with this is since you can’t be geographically restricted in pathology when job hunting, you may not get emails back or phone calls back after you send your CV to places where you don’t have local ties and are applying to get a job like me.

I am Surgpath/Cytopathology trained and am not getting emails back from some employers partly because (what I think) I’m “not from the area”. I haven’t seen many jobs near my hometown and am applying widely.

I also expect to hear the question “Why do you want to come to so and so city?” during interviews, if I’m granted one.

 

[path_spouse]

I just posted the "cold call" emails where recruiters are looking for pathologists in the Open Positions sticky thread.

Open positions

Assistant, Associate or Full Professor (HS Clinical, Clinical X) Hematopathology University of California, San Diego The Department of Pathology at the University of California, San Diego (http://pathology.ucsd.edu) is committed to academic excellence and diversity within the faculty, staff...

forums.studentdoctor.net

These positions are from the unsolicited emails regularly sent to me by recruiting firms.

One of these positions is in Monterey CA. I spent 9 months stationed at the Presidio and views, weather and attractions are very nice.

This is exactly the problem. While I have more geographic flexibility than a pathologist, jobs for me, and many other professional spouses, are concentrated in major cities. Monterey is a two hour drive from SF, without traffic. A quick search of the job market for me in Monterey suggests that there isn’t one. (Might be a different story if I were in tourism or agriculture...)

I don't have the impression that the pathology market is terrible—but then I come from basic science, so my bar is low.

However, pathology is a small field. If you look on pathoutlines for <subspecialty>+<particular metro area>, there might be one job at any given time. This makes dual-career situations difficult. As everybody else on this forum has noted, available pathology jobs are randomly scattered around the US. Many private practice jobs seem to be in exurbs that are not within easy commuting distance of a city, and many jobs that are in cities are sub-optimal (not partnership track, relatively low salaries, long hours and weekends.)

Even if two jobs are in the same general metro area, it's difficult to find ones within realistic commuting distance of each other. I mean you could be really excited that you found two jobs "in the DC area,” except you are in Manassas and the pathologist in Germantown with a contract saying s/he needs to live within 1/2 hour of the hospital, and good luck seeing your spouse or kids again.

Is it a “bad” job market in pathology? I don’t know...perhaps it's just a small field. I don't claim to understand all the market forces in medicine.

The end result, though, is the geographic distribution of pathology jobs can make dual-career situations difficult -- you can end up with soul-sucking commutes, commuter marriages, or one of the spouses just giving up his or her career. But this is a general problem of niche fields...if you are a hospital CEO and lose your job, there are probably only a handful of other hospitals in town and they already have CEOs, so you have to move.

I am happy to say that we did make our dual-career situation work--but it was not easy and required, and continues to require, massive career and quality-of-life sacrifices on both of our parts.

 

[WEBB PINKERTON]

Find a woman who is content staying home taking care of the children is the take home message.