Path, salaries and minorities...

[NewGuyBob]

I came accross a very nice booklet titled: "Career Guide in Pathology". On chapter 5, "women in pathology" it reads:
"In 1992, 22% of all US pathologists were women;however, there appear to be some disturbing differences that distinguish women pathologists from women in other medical specialties. These differences were cited from American Medical Association data by Dr Kay Woodruff in a 1992 report to the Society for Advancement of Women's Health Research Scienbtific Advisory Committee II. In her report Dr. Woodruff stated, "in a number of specialties women work less hours than men... in pathology, women work 47.8 weeks per year compared to 46.7 for men, 56.8 hours a week compared to 50.3 for men and earn $33.6 each hour versus $61.8 that men earn."
Now my questions are: Is this reflective of the situation for women pathologist nowadays? Are these the conditions minorities should expect after residency? Thanks for your comments!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Doctor B.]

Those are interesting statistics. I certainly hope that women aren't being paid less than men for the same amount of work. That would be quite unfair. One factor that may skew the salary statistics is the fact that there are probably more older male pathologists who have made partner in their practices (and consequently have a greater salary) than women at this point in time. The number of women in pathology is increasing greatly, though, and I bet those numbers change in a few years.

 

[GreatPumpkin]

I would like to see the statistics and the info on the men and women that submitted replies. I would say that on a percentage basis more women work in academic practice than men. And, more men are the heads of groups and the head of departments. What is the average age of each group? (i.e. if the avg age of women responder was 35 and the avg age of man was 55 that would invalidate the numbers). All of these things could skew the numbers dramatically. Normally stats like these are not adjusted for such confounding factors.

I always think that stats without a look at the research should be taken with a grain of salt especially if the authors have an agenda. I don't know if the Society for Advancement of Women's Health Research Scientific Advisory Committee II does, but judging from its name I would bet they do.

I have no doubt that there is discrepancies in pay between men and women and minorities in path, just like most other professions in the US. But, I highly doubt they are to the extreme that those numbers represent. A better look at what the market place is today would be compare the starting salaries of new pathologists, 5yr out, 10yrs out etc.. I think you would see the size of the margin dropping significantly as you get away from the "old boys club" generation into the more inclusive generations.

The women who have left my program in recent years have very good offers. I cannot say whether they will or will not hit a glass ceiling in the practices they went too, but I don't get the impression they feel that way.

As for minorities in path I don't have a good feel for how they fare compared to others. Many if not most of the minorities that have recently graduated from my program have gone into academics. The academic community is very diverse, so I would say they did fine and will have no problems. The private practice community is not as diverse and this is the area I just don't know about.

 

[NewGuyBob]

The reason why this numbers called my attention was that they were mentioned in the "Career Guide in Pathology" booklet published by the ASCP, which was published mostly to promote interest in Path among US med students!
Then again the booklet is from '93 and things could have changed significantly.
Thanks for your comments. My girlfriend wants to go into path and after reading the booklet and she was flipping out. Now she's more relaxed. If she finds out something else about the topic i'll post it here.

 

[pathstudent]

I have a really hard time believing that a female pathologist was only making 66,000 a year in 1992 ($33/hour X 2000 hours/ year). That is unfathombly low considering that in 1992 salaries were about at their peak and have decreased ever since. I also don't believe that the average male pathologist earned 120,000 a year in that lucrative era.

In fact, a friend of mine who just finished his path training in June, started working for a group in a city that HMOs have a stranglehold on. He says his salary is much lower than if he was in a more rural area. He is starting at 150,000 a year for the first two years. After that he becomes a partner in the group (unless he is a total screw up) and then he will be making a full share which is between 300-400 thousand a year. The group has not said exactly how much, but states that is where their salaries are now, and this is actually down considerably from its peak in the late 80s/early 90s. Also he gets 10 weeks of vacation a year.

I think path people put out those super low numbers to keep everyone from getting jealous considering they have the best and most interesting jobs in all of medicine. Maybe if you go into academics you can expect a salary closer to 200 K, but there is buku cash to be had in private practice, if you are willing to work hard (even with 10 weeks vacation!)

Even more suprising is the salary of radiologists. My friend says that a friend of his makes over 800 K a year in private practice as a radiologist in a city that has reduced salaries due to HMOs. Plus he can make an extra 100 K a year by taking call a few times a month!!!!.

Too bad pathologists can't take those kind of calls.

Don't worry there is still cash out there. Just work hard and do what you love. THe world will always need docs and docs will always make a good living even if salaries go up or down over the years.

Don't forget. Life is good to us and we need to give back by providing our services for free for those who would be burdened by the payment.

 

[pathstudent]

Pathologists are not paid by anyone. The federal government stated long ago that pathologists can not be paid directly by hospitals but need to bill patients/insurance companies just like all docs. Medicare pays X amount of dollars for a surgical path specimen whether it is a man or a woman.

 

[pathstudent]

let's discuss salaries more.

 

[GreatPumpkin]

What do you want to discuss? I would like to make more money. At least I break 40,000 this year, but my wife still makes more than me, DOH...hehe.

 

[Mindy]

Ha Ha, GP! I'm at 42,000 a year...

Oh wait...Of course I am working twice as many hours as you, and I pay 20,000 dollars a year in rent. Oh gosh, now I want to cry...



Mindy

 

[GreatPumpkin]

I would hate to tell you my mortgage payment Mindy you would cry.