DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Hey guys I just found the most accurate info on average medical salaries in the country. This is statistical analysis done by the UNITED STATES BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS. This should clear any debate over any other statics out there. It breaks it down by different specialties and different health proffessions. You can also click on each specific proffession for a detailed breakdown of wages in different states and type of employement. If you are interested in the methods they BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS employs when aquiring statistical data you can also search it on the website. Over all I found this to be the most accurate and comprehensive statistical data out there. This should finally stop any debate over wages.

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_29he.htm

SocialistMD

Resident Objectivist
15+ Year Member
The problem is that they choose to list hourly wage, which they've back-calculated from the annual salary assuming a 40-hour work week. Many of the areas they have listed work much more than 40 hours/week.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
they post hourly wage and ANNUAL SALARY so they are both accounted for. also if you read the bottom of the page it states :

(2) Annual wages have been calculated by multiplying the hourly mean wage by a "year-round, full-time" hours figure of 2,080 hours; for those occupations where there is not an hourly mean wage published, the annual wage has been directly calculated from the reported survey data.

This means that for a proffession like medicine where its not hourly wage, they take the yearly income. Look on the fourth column wage estimates and it tells you the yearly salary of the proffessions.

SocialistMD

Resident Objectivist
15+ Year Member
Right, but then they back-calculate hourly salary.

Example:
Surgeons make \$182,690/year. The listed hourly salary is \$87.83. If you do the math on this, it means they are working 40 hours/week for 52 weeks. My point is that it is a rare surgeon who works only 40 hours/week, which makes the hourly salary incorrect.

15+ Year Member

Llenroc

Bandidos Motorcycle Club
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
SocialistMD said:
Right, but then they back-calculate hourly salary.

Example:
Surgeons make \$182,690/year. The listed hourly salary is \$87.83. If you do the math on this, it means they are working 40 hours/week for 52 weeks. My point is that it is a rare surgeon who works only 40 hours/week, which makes the hourly salary incorrect.
So? It seems like their method is better, b/c they account for the fact that surgeons work more hours.

Otherwise its meaningless to say Dr. X makes Z and Doctor Y makes W without knowing how many hours each works.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Run MIMI your site is pretty good.. the numbers for internal medicine and general practice look right on cue with the ones from the US DEPARTMENT OF LABOR STATISTICS. the only thing I dont like about statistics from organizations representing a proffession is that they are usually unbiassed and skewed. When comparing differnet proffessions in the health field, I rather look at a source that comes from an unbiassed organization, so that if there are any errors its systematic.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
Llenroc said:
So? It seems like their method is better, b/c they account for the fact that surgeons work more hours.

Otherwise its meaningless to say Dr. X makes Z and Doctor Y makes W without knowing how many hours each works.

i agree

SocialistMD

Resident Objectivist
15+ Year Member
Llenroc said:
So? It seems like their method is better, b/c they account for the fact that surgeons work more hours.

Otherwise its meaningless to say Dr. X makes Z and Doctor Y makes W without knowing how many hours each works.
That's just it...it doesn't take this into account. It is based on a 40-hour work week. It is inflating the hourly salary of a surgeon because the denominator in the equation should be somewhere closer to 60 vs. 40.

Let me try to show the math one more time:
Salary: \$182,690
Number of weeks in a year: 52
Salary/week: \$3513 (182690/52)
Number of hours worked in a week: 40
Salary/hour (in a 40-hour work week): \$87.83 (3513/40)

Compare this with a 60-hour work week: 3513/60= \$58.55

What I'm trying to say isn't rocket science.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
SocialistMD said:
That's just it...it doesn't take this into account. It is based on a 40-hour work week. It is inflating the hourly salary of a surgeon because the denominator in the equation should be somewhere closer to 60 vs. 40.
I understand what you are saying... but what if you just look at the annual income

SocialistMD

Resident Objectivist
15+ Year Member
DREDAY said:
I understand what you are saying... but what if you just look at the annual income
Right, I don't have a problem with that. I'm just saying it is a shame they back-calculated it because it isn't an accurate number.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
SocialistMD said:
Right, I don't have a problem with that. I'm just saying it is a shame they back-calculated it because it isn't an accurate number.

Yeah the most effective way would be if they surveyed how many hours each of these salaried proffessions worked in 1 year.

nico05

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
BLS is ok for other professions, but not so much for physicians. There are so many more factors that come into play...too many to list. For example, if you were to work in New York as a surgeon, earning potential would be much higher, on average. The figures are also base pay only, not including bonuses. Those numbers are quite low and they are not a good tool to measure potential future income. At the very least, take into consideration your region, i.e. city/rural as well as where you think you may practice, private, hospital, etc.

OP
D

DREDAY

Senior Member
10+ Year Member
nico05 said:
BLS is ok for other professions, but not so much for physicians. There are so many more factors that come into play...too many to list. For example, if you were to work in New York as a surgeon, earning potential would be much higher, on average. The figures are also base pay only, not including bonuses. Those numbers are quite low and they are not a good tool to measure potential future income. At the very least, take into consideration your region, i.e. city/rural as well as where you think you may practice, private, hospital, etc.

They do take into consideration the region... click on the specialty you are interested in analyzing and you can see the statistics break down based on location, type of employment and many other things.

Llenroc

Bandidos Motorcycle Club
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
nico05 said:
BLS is ok for other professions, but not so much for physicians. There are so many more factors that come into play...too many to list. For example, if you were to work in New York as a surgeon, earning potential would be much higher, on average. The figures are also base pay only, not including bonuses. Those numbers are quite low and they are not a good tool to measure potential future income. At the very least, take into consideration your region, i.e. city/rural as well as where you think you may practice, private, hospital, etc.
Not necessarily. I used to live on Long Island, and the financial status of doctors there wasn't anywhere near as good as I've seen in some other (much less wealthy) places.

Two reasons:

High NYS taxes and cost of living on Long Island.

Salaries of doctors get driven down because there are too many of them on Long Island.

Ologist

Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Bottomline is that we're all gonna be paid well and have prestigious jobs where we can make huge differences in people's lives. Not too shabby if you ask me.

(Just try not to accumulate too much debt in med. school if at all possible)

_____________________________________________________________
Best blog ever: http://www.xanga.com/home.aspx?user=kmd1