online job ads

[2121115]

---

Members do not see this ad.

At what point during the year can we assume that online ads (pathoutlines, CAP website, etc) are looking for someone in 2011? Some specify "immediate opening" and some say "current fellows encouraged to apply" but most don't specify a timeline. Does the recruiting season for 2011 start around now or later in the fall?

 

[path24]

I would start applying now if I were u. The sooner the better. I have yet to hear of an online job getting under 40 CVs no matter when it is posted.

 

[BU Pathology]

I would start applying now if I were u. The sooner the better. I have yet to hear of an online job getting under 40 CVs no matter when it is posted.

Here is our experience with candidates applying for positions, although I recognize that our experience may differ from others.

All our jobs are posted on line. Our two most recent job postings had 8 and 30 applications. This was in response to multiple on line ads as well as print ads in New England Journal of Medicine and other journals. It was clear that several of the applicants were not qualified for the posted position, and in fact they re-apply for newly posted positions. Multiple applications for a position does mean that there are multiple viable candidates.

We have never recieved 40 CVs for any of the 28 faculty positions that we have filled in the past 3 years.

 

[Thrombus]

Here is our experience with candidates applying for positions, although I recognize that our experience may differ from others.

All our jobs are posted on line. Our two most recent job postings had 8 and 30 applications. This was in response to multiple on line ads as well as print ads in New England Journal of Medicine and other journals. It was clear that several of the applicants were not qualified for the posted position, and in fact they re-apply for newly posted positions. Multiple applications for a position does mean that there are multiple viable candidates.

We have never recieved 40 CVs for any of the 28 faculty positions that we have filled in the past 3 years.

How many of these faculty positions pay >175K for starting pathologists just out of training?

 

[Thrombus]

How many of these faculty positions pay >175K for starting pathologists just out of training?

Or better yet, how many of these faculty positions pay >250K for starting physicians (seen in every other medical profession who are s/p 5-6+ years of post-medical training)?

 

[Parts Unknown]

Or better yet, how many of these faculty positions pay >250K for starting physicians (seen in every other medical profession who are s/p 5-6+ years of post-medical training)?

Every other specialty with 5-6 years? Try looking around Boston for starting salaries of, say, heme/onc or infectious disease.

Nice redirect, BTW.

 

[Thrombus]

Every other specialty with 5-6 years? Try looking around Boston for starting salaries of, say, heme/onc or infectious disease.

Nice redirect, BTW.

Hem-Onc starts at 300K where I live. Not sure about ID -- don't know anyone who does that very well. Surgery, Rad Onc, Rads, Anesthesiology, Uro, GI, Derm would all laugh if offered less than 175K (at least where I am at).

I again pose the question -- how many jobs did BU Pathology have available to graduating trainees that paid >175K?
(Most of us would agree that this salary is on the low end for what a graduate would expect to make after 5-6 years of post medical school training).

(Of course if I were a guy offering jobs that paid 90K/year I wouldn't expect to get a whole lot of applicants either.....and I would be insulting other's intelligence by suggesting that 8-25 people applied for this job....this makes the salary paramount to any reasonable discussion)

 

[Parts Unknown]

Hem-Onc starts at 300K where I live.

Since you're asking the Chair of Boston University's Department of Pathology about comparative faculty salaries, it would be appropriate to restrict the conversation to academic salaries in Boston. Do you live in Boston?

I live in a large city and the Heme-Onc fellows here start <200K with crushing patient loads... and that's in private practices in the area. I know this because they cry on my shoulder sometimes (while I prepare to start a job that makes, well, let's just say it's more than 175K).

Not sure about ID -- don't know anyone who does that very well. Surgery, Rad Onc, Rads, Anesthesiology, Uro, GI, Derm would all laugh if offered less than 175K (at least where I am at).

And if you would prefer to do any of those jobs I would advise you to quit pathology now.

 

[Thrombus]

Since you're asking the Chair of Boston University's Department of Pathology about comparative faculty salaries, it would be appropriate to restrict the conversation to academic salaries in Boston. Do you live in Boston?

I live in a large city and the Heme-Onc fellows here start <200K with crushing patient loads... and that's in private practices in the area. I know this because they cry on my shoulder sometimes (while I prepare to start a job that makes, well, let's just say it's more than 175K).



And if you would prefer to do any of those jobs I would advise you to quit pathology now.

What we have here son is a failure to communicate.

175K is a salary many of us would find on the low end. Boston is an expensive place to live. I asked BU Pathology how many of these jobs he is claiming drew a reduced number of applicants to, offer a number above 175K! Most job applicants would find this information VERY pertinent to the discussion.

I then tried to claim that 250K is probably a more reasonable expectation for those of us that did 5-6 years of post medical training and would be in the low-end of the median considering other specialties.

A day's labor of pushing glass shoudl net one well over 175K if paid "fairly" in my view. If not paid that well, one is being taken advantage of, and it is no wonder that few apply for this servitude.

 

[Parts Unknown]

What we have here son is a failure to communicate.

175K is a salary many of us would find on the low end. Boston is an expensive place to live. I asked BU Pathology how many of these jobs he is claiming drew a reduced number of applicants to, offer a number above 175K! Most job applicants would find this information VERY pertinent to the discussion.

I then tried to claim that 250K is probably a more reasonable expectation for those of us that did 5-6 years of post medical training and would be in the low-end of the median considering other specialties.

A day's labor of pushing glass shoudl net one well over 175K if paid "fairly" in my view. If not paid that well, one is being taken advantage of, and it is no wonder that few apply for this servitude.

The original assertion from path24 (post #2) was that all online jobs get a minimum of 40 applications.

Dr. Remick gives two pieces of admittedly anecdotal information that contradicts the notion of 40+ applicants for every online job.

Now, there are several logical, reasonable responses one could make when faced with seemingly contradictory information.

Example:

"That is interesting, Dr. Remick. Was there anything in particular about those job postings that might have limited the applicant pool? Were you looking for candidates with highly subspecialized training? Did the job postings come with salary information that is not competitive for the area? Do you think this is simply reflective of the perceived gap in competition between academic jobs and private jobs?"

Or one could do what you did, which was to go off on a tangent replete with arbitrary salary figures and the assertion that pathology is the lowest paid specialty with 5+ years of postgraduate training. Does not follow.

 

[Thrombus]

The original assertion from path24 (post #2) was that all online jobs get a minimum of 40 applications.

Dr. Remick gives two pieces of admittedly anecdotal information that contradicts the notion of 40+ applicants for every online job.

Now, there are several logical, reasonable responses one could make when faced with seemingly contradictory information.

Example:

"That is interesting, Dr. Remick. Was there anything in particular about those job postings that might have limited the applicant pool? Were you looking for candidates with highly subspecialized training? Did the job postings come with salary information that is not competitive for the area? Do you think this is simply reflective of the perceived gap in competition between academic jobs and private jobs?"

Or one could do what you did, which was to go off on a tangent replete with arbitrary salary figures and the assertion that pathology is the lowest paid specialty with 5+ years of postgraduate training. Does not follow.

Blah Blah Blah.

It has been my experience, that most graduating pathologists desire to paid at a figure of around 200K (or more) for their first job. Because of this, I put the number of 175K out there in order to ask a question that has limited ambiguity and not subject to interpretation that your questions do. You ask your questions, and I will ask mine....no need to come in here and bark at a guy asking in his mind -- relevant questions to clarify the discrepancy that seems to exist.

I feel that my relevant question will appeal to most considering a career in pathology. If BU Pathology wants to continue to contribute to the discussion in a forthright manner, I am sure he/she will answer.

So -- BU Pathology -- How many of these jobs paid over 175K in first year salary to newly trained pathologists?

 

[Parts Unknown]

You ask your questions, and I will ask mine....

Your question is only germane if salary information was posted in the job advertisements that BU Pathology is referencing. If not, then you are essentially just registering nonspecific complaints about starting salaries in pathology.

 

[Thrombus]

Your question is only germane if salary information was posted in the job advertisements that BU Pathology is referencing. If not, then you are essentially just registering nonspecific complaints about starting salaries in pathology.

Memo to Parts Unknown -- Please allow the username Thrombus to ask his question and quit being so anal-retentive about it. For some reason, his question matters to him, even if it may not to you. So put down your badge for a moment, and let the man ask in peace.

Thank you very much.

 

[BierstiefelAndy]

Thrombus,

Not all jobs are created equal and the appointments that Dan Remick speaks of are those for academic positions. For those coming straight out of training, it is quite rare for folks to break $200K for an academic position. I only heard of one person breaking $200K as an assistant professor out of training; this person is at Mayo.

I cannot speak for Boston University but if you were to take up an academic position at one of the Harvard affiliated hospitals straight out of training, you will likely be appointed as an instructor. Take, for instance, the new GI pathology recruit at Brigham...he has a pretty strong publication record and he has no PhD. Academically, he has been very productive. His appointment...Instructor. If he isn't appointed as an assistant professor, I don't know what it would take to not be appointed as an instructor at Harvard...perhaps impossible... Now, instructor salaries do not come close to $175K and keep in mind that instructors make less than assistant professors. On the other hand, if you take up an academic job at other institutions, it is not uncommon for you to be appointed as an assistant professor.

I know Boston is an expensive city to live in, but for a newly appointed academic pathologist, you're not going to break 200K. Now, I don't think you're stupid so I have a feeling that your question is a rhetorical one. On the other hand, if you go into private practice, chances are quite good that your salary will be above 200K.

Blah Blah Blah.

It has been my experience, that most graduating pathologists desire to paid at a figure of around 200K (or more) for their first job. Because of this, I put the number of 175K out there in order to ask a question that has limited ambiguity and not subject to interpretation that your questions do. You ask your questions, and I will ask mine....no need to come in here and bark at a guy asking in his mind -- relevant questions to clarify the discrepancy that seems to exist.

I feel that my relevant question will appeal to most considering a career in pathology. If BU Pathology wants to continue to contribute to the discussion in a forthright manner, I am sure he/she will answer.

So -- BU Pathology -- How many of these jobs paid over 175K in first year salary to newly trained pathologists?

 

[Parts Unknown]

Memo to Parts Unknown -- Please allow the username Thrombus to ask his question and quit being so anal-retentive about it.

Forgive me, it simply depresses me to see a fellow pathologist use debate tactics that are common among young earth creationists.

 

[Thrombus]

Forgive me, it simply depresses me to see a fellow pathologist use debate tactics that are common among young earth creationists.

I forgive you, and thank you for reminding me of your mental superiority. Nothing here is being debated. I want to know how many jobs are >175K salary from BU Path since he entered the discussion. I feel we may now have an answer!!!

If it is true as Andy said, that salaries are not anywhere near 175 for new pathologists, then most people would not consider trying to raise a family in Boston in a decent neighborhood and forced to pay for expensive private schools for a decent education for their kids. This makes me feel that most of us in the field would not apply at his institution for these reasons. If my wife had a similar income and we had 1 or zero kids, or I was single, then his institution would be an option.

So we now may possibly conclude that financial reasons prohibit many good pathologists from applying at his institution. Obviously, his institution has people who are taking the great majority of the income generated from these pathologist's jobs. This, in my view, is a disgrace! I feel that if allowed to sign out 3-5K cases/year, as most of the pathology trainees I know expect to sign out, they should make >200K right out of training and potentially much more than that.

My next question is this -- who is confiscating all the money?

 

[BierstiefelAndy]

Again, I didn't speak for BU's department of pathology. It is still possible that they have a position with a starting salary of $175K+. This reasoning is somewhat based on inference because I have heard that the BU pathology residents earn more than the residents at any of the Harvard institutions. In fact, I recall hearing once that BU pathology residents are the highest paid pathology residents in Massachusetts. I wonder if these rumblings are true.

If so, one may extrapolate that BU path attendings starting out make more than those at Harvard...so I would still allow Dr. Remick to respond, if he wishes to do so. The jury is still out about the starting pay at BU...

Finally, this should be re-emphasized...the academic pathologist does not sign out all year long as do private practice pathologists (apart from vacation time). Because academic pathologists get anywhere from 25-50% protected time, they would be expected to generate less revenue; hence, the lower pay. Sure, with the protected time spent not-signing out, the academician is called to be academically productive...I guess one does this for free.

I forgive you, and thank you for reminding me of your mental superiority. Nothing here is being debated. I want to know how many jobs are >175K salary from BU Path since he entered the discussion. I feel we may now have an answer!!!

 

[KluverB]

... I feel that if allowed to sign out 3-5K cases/year, as most of the pathology trainees I know expect to sign out, they should make >200K right out of training and potentially much more than that.

My next question is this -- who is confiscating all the money?

Considering BU only does 20k surgicals a year, I doubt very much that anyone is signing out 3-5k cases per year. Your argument is invalid. At USCAP 2010, Dr. Weiss stated that most academic-appointed pathologists don't generate enough revenue to cover their own base salary, no matter how meager it may be. Perhaps they're not on service long enough? But then if they're on service, they can't do research, publish, advance, etc. Perhaps reimbursement might be the issue? Perhaps... Well, perhaps academics isn't for those who want to make a lot of money in pathology?

 

[Parts Unknown]

I forgive you, and thank you for reminding me of your mental superiority. Nothing here is being debated. I want to know how many jobs are >175K salary from BU Path since he entered the discussion. I feel we may now have an answer!!!

The answer has been obvious all along: zero. In the history of BU there have been zero new faculty hired straight from training making >175K.

Why is this obvious? Because you selected a salary based not on typical starting academic salaries for the Boston area, but on a salary figure your colleagues find desirable without regard to the type of job (private or academic, location NOS).

If it is true as Andy said, that salaries are not anywhere near 175 for new pathologists, then most people would not consider trying to raise a family in Boston in a decent neighborhood and forced to pay for expensive private schools for a decent education for their kids. This makes me feel that most of us in the field would not apply at his institution for these reasons. If my wife had a similar income and we had 1 or zero kids, or I was single, then his institution would be an option.

So we now may possibly conclude that financial reasons prohibit many good pathologists from applying at his institution.

Can we really conclude that? It would somewhat fly in the face of the conventional wisdom peddled ad nauseum on this forum: that any job anywhere, much less in a desirable metropolitan area with a high concentrations of pathology training programs (such as Boston), can exert such market power that it can pay people scraps and still have its pick of candidates.

If BU can only get 8 and 30 applicants a pop then maybe they need to get on the horn with Winona, MN and find out how they bagged 52+.

 

[pathstudent]

What's your point thrombus?

I was told that academic salaries in California and Upper Atlantic start around 150K or less because people find those locations so desriable while in the Midwest (i.e. mayo) you can earn 200k because they need to pay people more to live there.

Once you make your name you can earn just as much as those in private practice.

I just think it is awesome that BU has hired 27 people over the last 3 years. That is just one pathology entity and proves there are a lot of jobs.

 

[yaah]

Blah Blah Blah.

It has been my experience, that most graduating pathologists desire to paid at a figure of around 200K (or more) for their first job. Because of this, I put the number of 175K out there in order to ask a question that has limited ambiguity and not subject to interpretation that your questions do. You ask your questions, and I will ask mine....no need to come in here and bark at a guy asking in his mind -- relevant questions to clarify the discrepancy that seems to exist.

I feel that my relevant question will appeal to most considering a career in pathology. If BU Pathology wants to continue to contribute to the discussion in a forthright manner, I am sure he/she will answer.

So -- BU Pathology -- How many of these jobs paid over 175K in first year salary to newly trained pathologists?

Your scenario is what is known as a "rhetorical" question because it is one that you already know the answer to, and you are being too stubborn and confrontational to admit that your purpose in continuously posting it is simply inflammatory. Academic pathologists do not generally start out above 175k, or even above 150k often. I suspect you know this. Most people in your position probably do also. This is not limited to pathology. Starting attendings in almost every specialty where I trained had similar starting points. I'm sure you can post some anecdotes of other specialties where it is true at certain places you know, but this will not change things for the rest of the academic world. There are other benefits to academia. If your goal is primarily salary, then you probably wouldn't be considering academics. If this is the case for you, then please stop bombarding this thread with your nonsense. Part of the problem with your argument is this:

It has been my experience, that most graduating pathologists desire to paid at a figure of around 200K (or more) for their first job. Because of this, I put the number of 175K out there in order to ask a question that has limited ambiguity and not subject to interpretation that your questions do.

If you talk to graduating pathologists who are going into academics, they are not going to be looking for a starting salary of 200k or more unless their "academic" job is a hybrid type which is only academic in that it involves teaching residents. Their goal in their first job is to land the job which best fits their career goals. Salary is a relatively minor point. If most graduating pathologists you know are desiring at least this level of pay, then they are going into a private job. In which case your incessant badgering here is also bordering on irrelevant.

 

[yaah]

At what point during the year can we assume that online ads (pathoutlines, CAP website, etc) are looking for someone in 2011? Some specify "immediate opening" and some say "current fellows encouraged to apply" but most don't specify a timeline. Does the recruiting season for 2011 start around now or later in the fall?

A lot of times ads will actually say when the job is due to start. The best jobs often start recruiting for it a year or so in advance. I would say right now is a little early for jobs that are beginning in July 2011. Unexpected openings happen though (because someone dropped out, or someone in the group left unexpectedly). Expected recruitment often begins more about 1 year in advance. But every place is different. When I was applying for jobs (a year in advance of start date) one place I talked to said that they had some interest, but right now they were working on filling a position to start in 6 months. Another said they weren't sure yet whether they were going to hire for then but they would know in a few months. The position I would be potentially filling wasn't going to be discussed for at least another 4 months. Don't forget, a lot of job ads are also aimed at current practicing pathologists who don't necessarily have the same timeline for start date.

 

[Art]

Again, I didn't speak for BU's department of pathology. It is still possible that they have a position with a starting salary of $175K+. This reasoning is somewhat based on inference because I have heard that the BU pathology residents earn more than the residents at any of the Harvard institutions. In fact, I recall hearing once that BU pathology residents are the highest paid pathology residents in Massachusetts. I wonder if these rumblings are true.

If so, one may extrapolate that BU path attendings starting out make more than those at Harvard...so I would still allow Dr. Remick to respond, if he wishes to do so. The jury is still out about the starting pay at BU...

Finally, this should be re-emphasized...the academic pathologist does not sign out all year long as do private practice pathologists (apart from vacation time). Because academic pathologists get anywhere from 25-50% protected time, they would be expected to generate less revenue; hence, the lower pay. Sure, with the protected time spent not-signing out, the academician is called to be academically productive...I guess one does this for free.

According to the Directory of Pathology Training Programs 2010 -2011 the first year stipends for pathology residents are:
Beth Isreal 53K
Brigham and Womens 52K
MGH 52K
BU 51K

So the rumblings about BU residents being paid the most is not true.

Your other points about academic pathologists getting lower pay because of protected time are very valid, based on what I have heard.

 

[BierstiefelAndy]

According to the Directory of Pathology Training Programs 2010 -2011 the first year stipends for pathology residents are:
Beth Isreal 53K
Brigham and Womens 52K
MGH 52K
BU 51K

So the rumblings about BU residents being paid the most is not true.

Your other points about academic pathologists getting lower pay because of protected time are very valid, based on what I have heard.

Thanks for the clarification...good to know for future reference. 👍 No longer in Boston though so I could probably care less at this point 🙂

Assuming those figures are correct, the difference in salary appears negligible then.

 

[path24]

BU pathology...Are you hiring fresh out of fellowship people for these 28 jobs(individuals with one fellowship and no experience)? How many of the 28 fall into that category? Academics jobs seem to want subspecialization with specific research and experience (according to their ads anyway), so I could understand why you may get a lot less applicants.

The individuals I know that are looking for jobs are going (hoping for) private. I have yet to hear of a private job that they have applied for that was online that got less than 40 CVs. I have seen the emails and letters.

Basically your general fellow is up against 40-50+ CVs for a position. It is very much a reality/their experience for the all of the fellows that I know.

BU pathology...I would encourage you to call these ads yourself if you don't believe me. The truth is very much there.

 

[pathstudent]

BU pathology...Are you hiring fresh out of fellowship people for these 28 jobs(individuals with one fellowship and no experience)? How many of the 28 fall into that category? Academics jobs seem to want subspecialization with specific research and experience (according to their ads anyway), so I could understand why you may get a lot less applicants.

The individuals I know that are looking for jobs are going (hoping for) private. I have yet to hear of a private job that they have applied for that was online that got less than 40 CVs. I have seen the emails and letters.

Basically your general fellow is up against 40-50+ CVs for a position. It is very much a reality/their experience for the all of the fellows that I know.

BU pathology...I would encourage you to call these ads yourself if you don't believe me. The truth is very much there.

Will you guys just quit. He said that his experience was an n of 1.

And lastly there really isn't such a thing as private practice anymore. You can either be an employee of a university or of Ameripath or of American Pathology Partners or Quest or etc... The cottage industry days of pathology are ovahhhhh. The majority of private groups have sold their practices.

 

[deleted314957]

For many job seekers it is very much a catch-22. When I was a partner in a large private practice P.A. in Florida we never considered anyone without post-residency/fellowship experience (fellowships were not as common back then). If they had never been under the gun in real practice they would have to look elsewhere, regardless of where they went to school or residency. Experience, usually coupled with a personal contact with someone in the group ( not necessairly a partner) was the "in". The Pres of our board of directors who hired me could have cared less if i had done any research: he was more interested in my QA experience.

 

[Parts Unknown]

Basically your general fellow is up against 40-50+ CVs for a position. It is very much a reality/their experience for the all of the fellows that I know.

Three of the private jobs I interviewed for were advertised online. They all specified a desired subspecialty in the job posting, and they all told me that the majority (as in 80-90%) of the CVs they received were from people who did not possess said subspecialty training.

I was offered two of those jobs, BTW, and decided not to continue interest in the third.

 

[path24]

I have seen the emails and letters (thanks, but no thanks). 40-50+ CVs. I think most wanted subspec but didn't specify a type, didn't specifiy at all, or just said left it at a general fellowship.

What private practice job lasts more than a month on the CAP website? Seriously? None.

I will not apologize or be quiet about my knowledge/reality on job hunting in pathology. It is my reality (a terrifying one at that). I know of to many AMGs struggling to find a job.

parts unknown....what is your subspec in? (congrats on your search)

 

[Parts Unknown]

I have seen the emails and letters (thanks, but no thanks). 40-50+ CVs.

I agree that private jobs routinely get that many CVs, but when you trim out the misqualified applicants it may not look so grim. Well, assuming you have subspec training in something employable it may not look so grim.

parts unknown....what is your subspec in? (congrats on your search)

I'm in heme (thanks).

 

[Gyric]

We have referenced the AAMC publication in the past, which provides overall and regional academic salary data. I don't know the most recent numbers, but for 2007-2008 the average instructor salary was 121.4, 75th percentile was 156. For Assistant professor the average was 171.3, 75th % was 189; associate was 207.2/231 and professor was 248/287. It is unlikely that a starting asst professor will start at the 75th percentile, but it certainly happens and, with signing bonuses, it is possible for the first year's salary to exceed the lower end of staring private practice offers (based on my n=1 experience). I think Andy had a pretty nice starting package as well, and yes this is with 50% sign out. Just like in private practice, not all pathology departments have the same level of financial success and those that are more successful are able to pay their faculty higher salaries (often with significant end of year bonuses), establish endowed professorships, etc. Also, when comparing total compensation (including benefits, vacation, etc) between the two career paths there is less of a difference early on; obviously a major reward for running a small business well, as a partner, is the salary (300-600K is what I am hearing from people I trained with; you don't find these jobs posted online).

. At USCAP 2010, Dr. Weiss stated that most academic-appointed pathologists don't generate enough revenue to cover their own base salary, no matter how meager it may be. Perhaps they're not on service long enough? But then if they're on service, they can't do research, publish, advance, etc. Perhaps reimbursement might be the issue? Perhaps... Well, perhaps academics isn't for those who want to make a lot of money in pathology?

I did not leave with this impression. What I heard her say was that there are subspecialties that do not generate enough revenue to cover their own base salary (e.g. renal), while others (e.g. derm, gi) subsidize this group. She was making the point that if you are going to negotiate a raise you need to know your own balance sheet. If most pathologists in a department are not generating enough revenue to cover their "base" salary, then there is a serious problem.

 

[path24]

A general job ad getting 40-50+ applicants...then in theory all should be qualified. Why so many misqualified in a general job ad?

I agree, the cyto guy applying for a specific heme/whatever job is crazy. I think people are just that desperate. Then the misqualified numbers make sense.

The two heme fellows I know had a very different experience than you. No idea why. They felt they were lucky to get an offer.

 

[Parts Unknown]

A general job ad getting 40-50+ applicants...then in theory all should be qualified. Why so many misqualified in a general job ad?

If it's general then yes. Sorry, I was sort of speaking to my personal experience. I only applied to one online job that was general, didn't get a response, and forgot about it. Five months later they called to see if I was still interested. I was like "WTF, are you kidding me?"

I agree, the cyto guy applying for a specific heme/whatever job is crazy. I think people are just that desperate.

I wish I could see the CVs and get a better feel for the applicant pool. Perhaps in a year or two I will be on the other side of recruitment and can report back. I wonder how many of the CVs are not from new trainees, but are from people who are currently employed and looking to make a lateral or upwards move.

The two heme fellows I know had a very different experience than you. No idea why. They felt they were lucky to get an offer.

I felt lucky, too.

 

[KluverB]

...there are subspecialties that do not generate enough revenue to cover their own base salary (e.g. renal), while others (e.g. derm, gi) subsidize this group. She was making the point that if you are going to negotiate a raise you need to know your own balance sheet. If most pathologists in a department are not generating enough revenue to cover their "base" salary, then there is a serious problem.

Perhaps. I guess it depends how you calculate said revenue. Is revenue based on just PC or PC+TC? The rest is simple math. A quick back-of-the-envelope calculation tells me I would have to sign out >4,700 88305s (PC-component only) with 100% reimbursement, to make the 175k that Thrombus was shooting for above, and that doesn't include any overhead (at least where I'm at)! Once again, I don't see how that's possible at a place like BU, for example. I know I'm simplifying, IHCs + other testing may perhaps inflate the billing, but unless I'm doing hemepath, by how much?

 

[lipomas]

A general job ad getting 40-50+ applicants...then in theory all should be qualified. Why so many misqualified in a general job ad?

I think it might be interesting to pool the different groups and see how many of these 40-50 applicants overlap. I would suspect that there is a pool of individuals who are shotgunning their applications - kind of like med students do with derm residency applications or some path residents do with dermpath applications. Because if every group is getting 40-50 applicants, I can virtually assure you that they are not 40-50 unique individuals per job. That explains at least part of the applicant pool being unqualified. I know a few people who run groups and they have told me that they get random applications from individuals who have none of the listed "desired qualities" in the ad. Some other "unqualified" applications come from people who they know, and they know that they do not want to work with them. I know a lot of you keep criticizing me for saying this, but there is a pool of pathologists out there who are just not good at what they do, and few people want to work with them.



In regards to the original question, there are likely two types of job ads:
1) Ads to fill a position on a specific timeline
2) Ads looking for someone who will fit what they are looking for, timeline being less important.

If it is job #1, then the ad will often say the specific timeline or whoever the contact person is will tell you this. If it is #2 the start date may be very flexible (even with a range of up to 2 years).

 

[2121115]

I think it might be interesting to pool the different groups and see how many of these 40-50 applicants overlap. I would suspect that there is a pool of individuals who are shotgunning their applications ... I can virtually assure you that they are not 40-50 unique individuals per job ...

In regards to the original question, there are likely two types of job ads:
1) Ads to fill a position on a specific timeline
2) Ads looking for someone who will fit what they are looking for, timeline being less important.

If it is job #1, then the ad will often say the specific timeline or whoever the contact person is will tell you this. If it is #2 the start date may be very flexible (even with a range of up to 2 years).

Thanks, those are actually helpful thoughts. I agree that the high number of CV's submitted to online postings are the effect of shotgunning applications due to it being so easy to just alter a generic cover letter and then email that with a CV.

Which brings me to my next question. Has anyone here ever been hired at a position that they found on pathologyoutlines or the CAP website? I can only assume with the flood of CV's they get that it would be easy to lose one in the shuffle, even if the applicant is well qualified for the job. I have to think that the odds would be better at an unadvertised job where there may only be a small number of candidates considered (I suppose the trick is finding out about an unadvertized job in the first place). Just trying to get an idea of what my odds are if I apply to a job online, even if it matches my credentials.

 

[lipomas]

I have not (my job was not advertised formally). But I know people who have. Generally they did more than just send in their CV, but I know a couple who just contacted the person listed and heard back from them that there was interest, and that was that. That doesn't often bring your name to the forefront though. Unless your CV is sparkling or exactly fits what they need they are more likely to respond to personal contact (either from you or from someone who knows you are them).

There are some jobs out there that are just looking for a warm body (albeit a competent warm body!) to fill a need. Others are looking for something more and will put forth more effort and show more patience to get what they want.

 

[Parts Unknown]

Has anyone here ever been hired at a position that they found on pathologyoutlines or the CAP website?

I have been offered jobs that were posted on those sites (one from each), and one of my friends from residency found his current job through pathoutlines (in a very desirable location, no less).

The job I did end up taking was not advertised.

 

[Entgegen]

What is the best way to go about networking and thus hearing about the unadvertised jobs? Contacting local groups and dropping your name to help with grossing (i.e., possibly moonlighting) while in residency? Periodically contact local groups about potential openings throughout residency? Going to meetings and rubbing as many elbows as possible?

 

[2121115]

Contacting local groups and dropping your name to help with grossing (i.e., possibly moonlighting) while in residency?

Never heard of this one. Sounds like there would be a lot of legal and credentialing issues.

 

[Parts Unknown]

What is the best way to go about networking and thus hearing about the unadvertised jobs?

The best way is to have a fellowship director who knows people and will go to bat for you. It's good to be in an institution with a strong name; local groups will sometimes call around looking for upcoming grads.

One of the benefits of training in a large program with a lot of faculty and a lot of fellowships is that over four years you get to know a ton of people. Alums from your program who went before you can be very helpful in this process. Well, if they like you it can be helpful.

 

[Entgegen]

Never heard of this one. Sounds like there would be a lot of legal and credentialing issues.

Not sure about legal/credentialing issues, but I was talking with a local pathologist and she had said that there are groups in the area who contact local path programs to see if any of the residents would like to come help gross (moonlight) if, say, a PA or someone was out of town. She had said it was a good way to get some face-time/network with the groups and get your name out there a bit...provided you do a good job and the people you're working with like you.

 

[yaah]

Not sure about legal/credentialing issues, but I was talking with a local pathologist and she had said that there are groups in the area who contact local path programs to see if any of the residents would like to come help gross (moonlight) if, say, a PA or someone was out of town. She had said it was a good way to get some face-time/network with the groups and get your name out there a bit...provided you do a good job and the people you're working with like you.

I think this is less common than it used to be, but does still happen. I don't believe there are any serious legal issues but I admit I can't comment with any real certitude on that. It could potentially involve medical licensing, depending on how much of a role you actually played.

I would second Parts Unknown's point on networking. Some people also make great inroads at local (state) pathology meetings. Basically it never will hurt you to contact a group you are interested in, unless you start contacting them too frequently of course.