ASCP job survey just out.
Dismal!!!!
thumbdownthumbdown
What is the soothsayer's spin now?????
Dismal!!!!
thumbdownthumbdown
What is the soothsayer's spin now?????
Maybe because one-quarter did not even apply for one?
61% had been looking for less than a month
ASCP job survey just out.
Dismal!!!!
thumbdownthumbdown
What is the soothsayer's spin now?????
That's pretty demoralizing.
After 4 years of college, 4 years of med school, 4 years of residency training and then fellowship training, you only have 50% chance of getting a job.
if that's how you interpret that survey after 12 years of higher education and training, you probably don't deserve a job.
What?!?!?!?! No wonder they didn't get a job. You got to always be looking from day #1 of residency.
A - B - JH
A - Always
B- Be
JH - Job hunting
Maybe not "heavily recruited", but I was led to expect my application would be looked upon with more interest than an application to work at Wendy's.If you went into pathology thinking you would be heavily recruited, you were wrong.
The problem is that it has been this way for so long in your field - unfilled spots being snatched up by IMGs, many of whom are severely questionable - that your field's reputation is that of poor communicators and underqualified practitioners, not intelligent physicians, and it is the status quo for pathology to be so marginalized. Since labcorps don't care as long as they have bodies to do the work, and academics don't care as long as they have someone to gross and write papers, they ensure that the supply keeps coming by playing prominent roles in your professional organizations, coming up with flawed studies warning of an impending shortage that will never come.
Really? How many other medical specialties that have gone through this much training have to do this amount of job hunting. Plus, what GOOD pathology group is going to field a call from a first year resident and say . . . oh yeah I remember you. We have been holding this spot for you for five years b/c there haven't been any other pathology grads who were any good. This is bad advice. Doesn't work. If the group is any good, and they need to fill a spot, they have about 50 eager, decent pathology grads each year to choose. Groups are scared to advertise b/c they know they will get hundreds of replies.
It's not so easy as to suggest that the job market is the biggest factor in the perpetual decline of the field of pathology, but it certainly is one of the major reasons for it.
Behind-the-scenes specialties need to keep numbers low, or risk becoming commodities. Even if this means bad hours or high stress.
Pathology, due to its exceptionally weak leadership, failed to realize this and flooded the market with warm bodies, making tissue diagnosis a commodity rather than a profession. Congratulations! Now that cost is the only factor in differentiating providers, smart, proud doctors will train in fewer numbers, leaving the rest of the spots open for low-quality troglodytes. A strong medical student matching to pathology is akin to the valedictorian being put in the "slow class".
Radiology is currently facing the same fate. They would do well to look to the sinking (sunk) ship that is pathology.
Whatever. Rads is one of the worse for taking low-quality students. Its the speciality ex-frat boys choose, along with gas. Most pathologists are intelligent but they are terribly introverted or english is their second language.
I doubt any pathologists have sat in the frat house late at night lighting their own farts in front of a group of people, unlike most radiologists and gas men.
A strong medical student matching to pathology is akin to the valedictorian being put in the "slow class".
.
I know you're just trolling, but do you really believe this? How many pathologists do you know? A lot of bright students go into pathology. Do you think people in MSTP programs at top 10 schools are idiots? Pathology has been the second or third most popular specialty among that group for a long time. Some end up doing lab research, but the majority end up practicing pathology in either academics or private.
I know a CP pathologist in Canada (US citizen) that has a good gig. If they are using PhDs, they probably have a shortage of pathologists. You still need to hire AP folks.Heard pathologists don't do CP in Canada, they leave it to Ph.D's.
You wanted your "data", here is what the chair of this job survey has to say
http://www.ascp.org/Newsroom/2013-F...vey-Reveals-Hiring-Outlook-Training-Gaps.html
Still, there is somewhat of a disconnect, Dr. Rinder says. We hear from several sources that the workforce is going to (eventually) need more pathologists. Yet, right now based on this survey, we see that some of our fellows are having a difficult time finding a job. What we need, and what residents are asking for, is hard data on what jobs are currently available.
Heard pathologists don't do CP in Canada, they leave it to Ph.D's.
Conclusions:
The job situation for pathology fellows is mixed; most receive one or more offers,
but a substantial minority is not finding employment right away. This latter circumstance
may weigh on fellows' decisions to pursue additional fellowship training.
Most fellows receive a job offer within the first six months, but some need up to a year
for a positive response.
http://www.ascp.org/PDF/Fellowship-Reports/ASCP-Fellowship-Job-Market-Surveys.pdf
Better have a nice emergency fund, you may be out of work for a year and in the unemployment lines. Our own organizations are telling us this, but for people like MLW, it falls on deaf ears. Medical students, take warning and look at our own job surveys from ASCP.
Don't claim my ears are deaf. It's not my fault you diagnostic guys have a crappy job situation, and I am not ignorant of the situation, just less knowledgeable because it's not my situation.
I've never seen a candidate who struggled (read: finished training and didn't obtain employment, and was willing to move) to find a job stand up and say they're a sub-par candidate. It's always the job market, the job market, the job market. All the pathologists I know in the flesh-and-blood world, not on here, who were competent pathologists and not walking Axis II diagnoses found work. If I apply to be center for the Knicks and don't get it, it's not because the market is poor... it's because I am a sh**y basketball player. Maybe, just maybe, you and some of the other gloom-and-doom crowd on here should open your minds to the possibility that perhaps some of the people who couldn't find employment are sh**y pathologists... or just keep blaming it on the job market if that makes you feel better.
I don't have data about the quality of the individuals who have struggled to find jobs. I'm not sure such data exists, and even if it did, we could debate what defines a "sh**y pathologist." I actually agree with what you're saying - that perhaps some solid candidates struggle to find jobs - but you and others on here refuse to acknowledge any alternatives to these individuals' struggles beyond, bad job market, bad job market, or bad job market. I don't know what your practice situation is, but if you were in private practice and interviewed someone who had mediocre or poor LoRs, was awkward socially, failed to recognize her/his own limitations diagnostically, and not-infrequently missed relatively straightforward diagnoses, would you hire that person? Would another group? Would an academic center? If the answers are "no" then is that an indictment of the job market, or the individual candidate? Would any of us want our mother's breast biopsy reviewed by that hypothetical pathologist? Persons who cannot do the job, don't deserve the job - you're darn right I'll put that on the individual.
I don't think I'm violent (whatever that means in the context of a virtually meaningless internet discussion)... just frustrated that people misrepresent reality. I also disagree with comments from those who say the job market is wonderful and that every med student who consider a career in pathology. There is a middle ground. The job market is sub-optimal, and some bad candidates struggle to find jobs. Show me a field of medicine where that is not true. Med students, informed ones at least, likely know this to be true in virtually every area of medicine in the US.
I don't doubt that there are some trainees out there who fit that description. But there is no way to know how many, or if it is related to the "bad job market".
However, reducing training spots overall, especially at particular institutions, would go a long way to alleviating both issues.
"Disconnect" What you call something when you don't want to admit reality. There is "a shortage" but pathologists can't find jobs....oh wait its a disconnect!! Pathetic response from pathetic organizations/individuals/programs.
Nice to see US citizens having to leave the country to find work. Another disconnect!!!
What med students need to learn from this forum, is to not go into pathology and know that any specimen you send to pathology you can take a cut of the money. Pathologists are a dime and dozen and ripe for explotation by anyone.
Whatever. Rads is one of the worse for taking low-quality students. Its the speciality ex-frat boys choose, along with gas. Most pathologists are intelligent but they are terribly introverted or english is their second language.
I doubt any pathologists have sat in the frat house late at night lighting their own farts in front of a group of people, unlike most radiologists and gas men.
What med students need to learn from this forum, is to not go into pathology and know that any specimen you send to pathology you can take a cut of the money. Pathologists are a dime and dozen and ripe for explotation by anyone.
cap today: cap president also pushing the upcoming shortage of pathologists crap. In 2010 there was 5.7 paths per 100,000....aka way to many, terrible job market. And apparently using 2010 as the normal, optimal path number. Docs "electing" to do multiple fellowships....i don't remember "electing" to, it was more about putting food on the table and hoping for a future in this field.
Maybe the unemployed half of hemepaths should email him and ask about a job. His response?
There is literally no hope or future for this speciality.
Remember when Duke got into trouble for their worthless gene-based tests?
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/08/health/research/08genes.html?_r=0
Just think, some people dont want these tests regulated. What a joke. These lab developed tests NEED regulation. I foresee patients getting screwed under the guise of "personalized medicine".
LOL. I would like to know how half the stuff we do benefits anyone. I would like to know how much money we spend on QC/proficiency and how much evidence their is that it saves lives. If we did an inspection every 5 years as opposed to 3 years. How about QC every other day or weekly instead of daily. Etc. Etc... Where is the evidence? Where is the benefit? I thought this was a science not an extortion scheme.
LOL. I thought this was a science. . .
LOL. I would like to know how half the stuff we do benefits anyone. I would like to know how much money we spend on QC/proficiency and how much evidence their is that it saves lives. If we did an inspection every 5 years as opposed to 3 years. How about QC every other day or weekly instead of daily. Etc. Etc... Where is the evidence? Where is the benefit? I thought this was a science not an extortion scheme.
Why is the field of pathology in such bad shape?