Pathology salaries

[Patho_girl]

I was trying to find out salaries for different specialities (Gi, derm, soft tissue)in pathology for both private and academic jobs. Can somebody give a ballpark? Thanks

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[coroner]

Your handle reminds of Path Mama, who is long since gone. So I'll leave you with a post from her 10 years ago which I would say is still in the ballpark..

Don't shoot me! This is my first post.

For what it's worth, just adding my anectodotal experience with the job search this year. Among the job offers that we received (we're all just finishing fellowship training in non-derm area) in Washington State, Virginia, Michigan, North Carolina, and South Carolina, our starting salaries for private practice, partnership-track ranged from 180K to 210K, with partner salary quoted as 300K to 500K.

 

[maxwell3013]

Starting PP salaries from 180K to 210K?

So 5 years of GME training in pathology generates the same starting salary as FP (3 years) or CRNA? What a joke..

 

[Thrombus]

Starting PP salaries from 180K to 210K?

So 5 years of GME training in pathology generates the same starting salary as FP (3 years) or CRNA? What a joke..

That is if you are lucky to get this high paying job. Many have to do "jr faculty" for years where they get paid 80k or so, after 4 years residency and 2-3 fellowships.

Also these are old figures. Our group has seen a 20% decline in reimbursement the last few years. Pathology figures to keep losing in years ahead. Avoid this field unless you are independently wealthy or have no family.

 

[mlw03]

Your post will likely lead to another angry rant, but I'll try to weigh in for your answer. It's gonna be a wide range, based on specialty, academic vs private, and geography. I'm a forensic guy in Canada, so I can't say much about US salaries. In western Canada, paths make in the 330-350 (CAD of course) range, without too much variability between academic vs private, general vs someone with subspecialty practice.

I was trying to find out salaries for different specialities (Gi, derm, soft tissue)in pathology for both private and academic jobs. Can somebody give a ballpark? Thanks

 

[coroner]

I would also mention that for private practice, typically the salaries don't differ too much based on specialties. They are what sets you apart as far as skillset/expertise and can get you in a group if they have a need for it; but once people are equal partners, there is typically little variance. There is more of a difference based on seniority and shareholder/equity status rather than who did what fellowship. Again, this is for private practice, partnership-track positions; not hospital-based employees or Quest/LabCorp scope-monkeys. Even for academics, I wouldn't think Professor soft tissue is going to earn any more or less than Professor renal because of their specialty. It depends more on seniority/academic rank/title, time spent on clinical duties vs research or teaching among other factors. As far as private practice, which I'm familiar with, the sentiment I mentioned above was stated in the past by LADoc in regards to dermpath:

the people that somehow think having a dermpath fellowship will magically make them wealthy are in for a VERY big shock. A vast majority of the DP trainees from path, Im talking 90%+, enter general path groups making *maybe* 10 grand more than someone with cyto the first year and become partner on the exact same time schedule as everyone else.

Now, you could also just join a private group but realize you will be taking the same call with the same buy-in and the same surg path responsibilities as someone who is a generalist. Being dermpath boarded merely "buys you a ticket" to sit in the group, nothing more.

Also these are old figures. Our group has seen a 20% decline in reimbursement the last few years. Pathology figures to keep losing in years ahead. Avoid this field unless you are independently wealthy or have no family.

Thrombus, I wouldn't bother to responding to a dentist who appeared out of the blue in the pathology forum to mock us in their very first post, but regardless...

Yes, the figures are old, but still in the ballpark for private practice. Our reimbursement has declined as well even though our volume has been stable. Despite that, I am not independently wealthy (yet), but have avoided having a family so I don't have a shreiking wife wondering how she can pay for her next Gucci bag...

Anyway, dug up another another oldie, but a goodie from almost 10 yrs. ago. Much of it is still relevant. Our field hasn't changed that much...

Let's talk salary...

 

[pathmonkey]

Starting PP salaries from 180K to 210K?

So 5 years of GME training in pathology generates the same starting salary as FP (3 years) or CRNA? What a joke..

So go train as a CRNA, then. Since when is pay directly proportionate to length of training? Its much more about revenue generated by the individual and supply/demand for their skills.

In this case, the biggest difference here is that FPs and CRNAs tend to work in a much narrower range of payment. They're functionally limited by the number of patients they can see in a day, and therefore their salaries tend to top out at not much higher than entry level.

Most pathologists pay isn't limited by their ability to sign out cases, its limited by the volume of cases their practice has. The ones that can see really high volumes (or at least suck off revenues from others who do) can earn a lot more. Of course with ever-dropping reimbursement, we're all having to see more and more cases just to make the same pay. . .that's a different issue/question. Many pathologists also still get to go home early if they sign out all their cases and aren't covering the OR. CRNA's can't, and unless their scheduled pts cancel, FM docs can't, either.

Answer to the original question is that its too broad to answer. Range of pay for pathologists ranges from probably $90k for some hapless entry level academic attending who is basically just a notch above a fellow, to $800k, for a guy who is a practice owner getting paid for a huge volume (which is being signed out by his half-dozen employee pathologists, with him keeping a disproportionate share). $180-200k is a reasonable figure now for someone starting into a decent full-time private practice/community type general pathology job. . .and yes, there are jobs like that out there. . .you just have to find them. Someone with a few years of practice experience (eg the person leaving that hapless entry level academic position) with desirable subspecialty training may be able to start a little higher. . .probably not much.

Academic practice pay is generally less, but that's *highly* dependent on credentials, seniority, location, grants, and individual arrangement the particular pathologist has with their department. In some cases super-duper experts that bring in considerable consult business to a given department will be compensated accordingly, either by higher salary, or by getting to keep some of the revenue they generate. This isn't going to apply to some young pathologist just out of training. In GENERAL, the junior academic attending jobs are the lowest paid ones out there. . .though still better than NO job! I'll defer to someone who knows exactly what these people are being paid now, but I think $90-140k is probably the range. There are academic jobs where the pay is more along a community/private model, where individual pathologists can get incentive pay for volumes, and/or if the dept itself does well. .but most don't work this way.

Cont'd. . ..

 

[pathmonkey]

cont'd. . .

Coroner above is 100% correct about how pathologists get paid, and his quotes from LaDoc are also correct.

GI and Derm lend themselves to high volumes and therefore POTENTIALLY high pay (if the pathologist is actually signing out high volumes), though in reality those subspecialty markets are highly competitive, and its next to impossible for anyone who isn't generating their OWN specimens (eg a dermatologist/dermpath person) to go and establish a volume practice nowadays. The overwhelming majority of derm and GI only jobs are corporate gigs, where the gigantic corporate entity eats all the technical component, and pays the pathologist the equivalent of 1/3 of the professional component. You *can* get paid >$300,000 in a job like this, assuming you're experienced and can actually find the right one. . .but you have to sign out >30,000 cases per year to get it!

As mentioned above, having training in those areas can help you find a job. . .but barring fairly unusual circumstances, you won't get paid more than other partners in the same practice without your credentials. Yes, this means that in most mixed/practice private groups the GI/derm guys get the same pay for doing higher volume than their partners. IE, they actually get paid *LESS* on a per-case basis. . .though maybe they'll "make up" for increased signout volumes by not being assigned as many administrative-type tasks.

Soft-tissue. . .while I won't say its not a useful skill to have, the reality is that soft tissue pathology volume is so low, that this particular area of expertise isn't in particularly high demand.

Most nominal "soft-tissue" jobs are academic ones at tertiary care centers, and even there most of the "soft tissue" guys still sign out other pathology too, and/or do a considerable amount of research or other non-clinical work. In a primary/community setting soft tissue tumors are relatively uncommon, and the truth is most of them can still be reported by competent surgical pathologists. The few diagnostically tough cases per year can be sent out for expert consultation, instead of needing to hire some soft-tissue fellowship trained pathologist, who'll still be spending 99.9% of their time doing non soft tissue work.

 

[ygdrasil]

I was hired a couple of years ago at a private practice group in the midwest. Starting salary: $220K. Salary when I make partner: around $500K.

 

[Tiki]

I know a lot of folks in academics, and I don't know anyone who started under 140,000. At my institution on the east coast, assistant professors start about 170,000 (and all of our faculty came in as assistant professors, we don't have any instructors).

 

[pathmonkey]

I know a lot of folks in academics, and I don't know anyone who started under 140,000. At my institution on the east coast, assistant professors start about 170,000 (and all of our faculty came in as assistant professors, we don't have any instructors).

Thanks for the update. That sounds like its probably right.

It was around a decade ago, but back when I did the jr faculty thing, the pay was $120k, and that was so low I got an unexpected "embarrassment" bump to $135k the next year so I wouldn't defect to one of several other places offering more for new academic attendings. Of course this was before the big reimbursement cuts, and when the job market for path was a little better than now.

I know pay for entry level academic pathologists is highly institution-dependent. Some pay significantly more than others. EG, sometimes the bigger name places believe that part of your "pay" is the prestige of working there. If you look at the pay on a PER CASE basis, academic pay may not necessarily be that bad. . .depends on what kind of work you're doing and what the other expectations are. For a young single person accustomed to earning less than half that as a fellow, $150k(+) is not a bad place to be.

 

[Sulfinator]

I got an academic offer last year for $170k.

 

[icpshootyz]

Private practice, hospital-based, Northeast. Started $260K, full partner share is around $500K, depending on business volume for the year.

 

[Euchromatin]

From my own experiences in the job hunt during the last academic year and what I heard from several other fellows at the same time, private practice offers for those of us fresh out of fellowship were typically in the $200-250k range for the first year with small incremental raises every year until you made partner (included practices in the Midwest, Northeast, South). I didn't hear of anyone getting a signing bonus, but payment of moving expenses seemed fairly common. The couple of PP groups I personally interviewed with offered a 3 year partnership track, everyone in the group were partners and all the partners made the same (no extra for those with more seniority or based on specialty, partners who retired were bought out). People are generally a little coy/vague about partner earnings, but I would conservatively estimate $350-450k at the lower end. I was also offered a relatively higher starting salary for an academic position in Canada (I think you can look up what physician salaries in Canada are because they're all "government" positions?), but there was minimal potential for any increase afterward. As I understand it, salaries do not increase unless your department is able to negotiate some kind of cost of living adjustment (or something) with the provincial government. No one I know personally was willing to share specific details regarding their starting salary in academics other than the fact that it was "lower."

 

[rollwithit]

I strongly advise against listing income info on a public forum. This can only be used against us.

I strongly advise not citing message board fodder in any sort of meaningful adult conversation.

 

[yaah]

I suspect the "average" partner type salary has declined substantially in the past several years. Starting salaries may be similar but "top end" salaries for the most part are likely declining for standard private positions. How much? Hard to say. Totally depends on your environment and where your income comes from. But in some cases I suspect top end salaries of some have declined 30-40%. Many pathologists, even some in partnership positions, are essentially salaried so it doesn't really matter. Lower end salaries probably haven't declined very much because there isn't a significant outreach, outpatient biopsy component. It is the higher end ones that fluctuate more, the ones that depend on reimbursement and outreach business - because even if business is stable, reimbursement (or collection of reimbursement!) per case may have plummeted. Payment from hospitals for hospital based work are likely more stable.

 

[coroner]

The 2016 MDsearch Salary Guide has our field coming in at about $385K. Not too shabby…

 

[gbwillner]

The 2016 MDsearch Salary Guide has our field coming in at about $385K. Not too shabby…

I'm always of the first to question the naysayers around here, but.... those numbers are insane. They must only be placing medical directors, CMOs, department Chairs, and full partners based on those numbers. About one half of our field is in academia, and mean salaries there are about one half of that figure.

 

[coroner]

About one half of our field is in academia

Not even close. I would've guessed it's around two thirds private/one third academic tops... but probably around 70/30. And I don't think most people here would believe half of our field is in academics without even looking at any stats.
According to information from the Intersociety Council on Pathology Information, "approximately 75% of practicing pathologists are in community practice".

**************

As far as the salary numbers, I think everyone knows academics aren't in that league as you and others pointed out.

Many have to do "jr faculty" for years where they get paid 80k or so

In GENERAL, the junior academic attending jobs are the lowest paid ones out there. . .but I think $90-140k is probably the range.

I know a lot of folks in academics, and I don't know anyone who started under 140,000. At my institution on the east coast, assistant professors start about 170,000...

I did the jr faculty thing, the pay was $120k

I got an academic offer last year for $170k

However, partners in PP are.

...Among the job offers that we received (we're all just finishing fellowship training in non-derm area) in Washington State, Virginia, Michigan, North Carolina, and South Carolina...with partner salary quoted as 300K to 500K.

...to $800k, for a guy who is a practice owner getting paid for a huge volume

Salary when I make partner: around $500K

...full partner share is around $500K

People are generally a little coy/vague about partner earnings, but I would conservatively estimate $350-450k at the lower end

These are all fair estimates speaking for myself (including interviews I've been on) as well as colleagues whom I personally know in both academia & PP.
However, it seems your beef is the survey states $385K as the average salary for pathologists in general and doesn't consider jr. - mid career academics, non-partners in PP, etc. which is a valid point. But, the survey does state they compile their data from multiple physician salary reports every year so, are you claiming they're all way off too? Also, I would add that these numbers are pretty standard fare for hospital-based employed physicians as well (which is a growing segment). I know my hospital uses physician salary reports/surveys (not this) to decide what to offer to medical staff and the MDSearch numbers are definitely in the ballpark for not just pathologists, but other doctors I know on staff e.g. hospitalists, urologists, surgeons, etc.

 

[BU Pathology]

$500,000 compensation and benefits package. The following is from a "cold call" email that I get where recruiters are looking for pathologists. I try to post most of these on the job listing section, but sometimes I get busy and don't have time to list all of them.

$500,000 compensation and benefits package

Santé Consulting has recently been engaged to conduct a National search for the position of Vice Chairman. Our client is a community hospital based practice, located in an attractive Northeastern community.

They are seeking, due to a recent retirement, an outgoing, forward thinking pathologist to serve as Medical Director/ Vice Chairman. This group of pathologists has a case load of 16K surgicals, 4K cytologies, and 1.6M clinical lab tests annually.

The ideal candidate must be: outgoing, possess leadership skills, exceptional interpersonal skills, and clinical skills. Must also have at least 7 years of experience in a hospital based setting, be board certified in Anatomic and Clinical Pathology.

Our client is offering a very generous compensation and benefits package, including relocation assistance. If you feel you have what it takes to be a leader in your field, and are willing to work hard, then apply today. This position will not last long.

Contact:
Rich Cornell
President
Santé Consulting, LLC
[email protected]
Phone: 636-777-7885

 

[KeratinPearls]

Good try but there are too many pathologists looking for a job.

As seen on the CAP website online career center:

The Job you are looking for is no longer available.

The job may have reached it's monthly apply limit. Please check again at the beginning of next month.

 

[AZpath]

There is a wide range of compensation in private practice. It can vary radically just by the payor mix. Other factors such as lab ownership and part A pay play a large role.
Salary positions are lower paid and this slowly going to take a larger roll. Partnership will be harder to find as reimbursement rates drop.

 

[Pathology GIT]

http://www.ascp.org/Residents/Resident-Resources#tabs-1

this is a link from the ascp survey for the past few years asking fellows, like myself about job offers. @014 was 4-60% of fellows offerend noooo jobs. 2015 30-50% fellows offered no jobs.
I am also in this situation, having done 2 fellowships at esteemed institutions and no job ofeers as of now!
what a terrible field to choose!!

 

[Brahnold Bloodaxe]

I have no interest in pathology but sometimes browse this forum out of a morbid sense of fascination at "worst case scenarios" in the medical job markets.

What confuses me is that you have threads like these, where graduating residents/fellows are bouncing around partnership track positions that hit the neighborhood of half a mil, while in other threads other guys are bemoaning their inability to get a job, any job. What gives? I understand that everyone's personal situation is different, but if there is such a profound oversupply of pathologists that a large percentage of them can't even find a job, what motivates groups to hand out partnership tracks at 500k? Seems like those groups are leaving money on the table by handing out those salaries, what with such a supply/demand mismatch in their own favor.

 

[yaah]

Because it is not true that "A large percentage of pathologists can't find a job."

It is also true that there are the following in this field:
1) A lot of crappy jobs (or "abusive" jobs for lack of a better word - not true abuse but relatively abusive compared to better practice locations)
2) A lot of sub-par graduates and practicing pathologists who the best groups avoid hiring (some have poor communication skills, some have poor organization skills, some have poor diagnostic skills, some are distracted by other things or don't care much).
3) A lot of good jobs that have very low turnover and few openings (like one spot every 5 years).

The jobs in #1 and in #3 both get flooded by #2 when they advertise positions.

There are a lot of graduating residents who have more difficulty than other specialties, and many who have to take less desirable jobs. But very few end up unemployed unless there is something problematic in their application or history.

 

[jp123ok]

I'm curious, what percentage of pathologists do people think are "sub-par" according to the criteria that Yaah listed (poor communication skills, poor organization skills, or poor diagnostic skills)? 10%, 20%, 50%?

Among the people who I trained with, 15-20% would have fitted into one of the categories. Where I work it is probably more like 3o%.

 

[mlw03]

I'm curious, what percentage of pathologists do people think are "sub-par" according to the criteria that Yaah listed (poor communication skills, poor organization skills, or poor diagnostic skills)? 10%, 20%, 50%?

Among the people who I trained with, 15-20% would have fitted into one of the categories. Where I work it is probably more like 3o%.

I'd guess 25%. Certainly in that ballpark in forensic path I think.

 

[LADoc00]

I have no interest in pathology but sometimes browse this forum out of a morbid sense of fascination at "worst case scenarios" in the medical job markets.

What confuses me is that you have threads like these, where graduating residents/fellows are bouncing around partnership track positions that hit the neighborhood of half a mil, while in other threads other guys are bemoaning their inability to get a job, any job. What gives? I understand that everyone's personal situation is different, but if there is such a profound oversupply of pathologists that a large percentage of them can't even find a job, what motivates groups to hand out partnership tracks at 500k? Seems like those groups are leaving money on the table by handing out those salaries, what with such a supply/demand mismatch in their own favor.

Pathology is ultimate example in medicine of the income inequality possible due to situation, personal drive, inherent ability and acquired skill.

Think Professional Actors. A vast majority and I know many, of professional actors with SAG cards (meaning they have and are being paid to act), are completely unable to live on their earnings as an actor. They work other jobs to make ends meet. And when I say vast majority I mean almost all, even those in porn. Then a tiny fraction of those at the top make insane dollars.

What does that tell you about a career in acting?

There are many pathologists that will make less than what a nurse makes today and then will be a tiny minority at the top that will pull down 20K+ for a day's work.

 

[Zarniwoop]

Pathology is ultimate example in medicine of the income inequality possible due to situation, personal drive, inherent ability and acquired skill.

Think Professional Actors. A vast majority and I know many, of professional actors with SAG cards (meaning they have and are being paid to act), are completely unable to live on their earnings as an actor. They work other jobs to make ends meet. And when I say vast majority I mean almost all, even those in porn. Then a tiny fraction of those at the top make insane dollars.

What does that tell you about a career in acting?

There are many pathologists that will make less than what a nurse makes today and then will be a tiny minority at the top that will pull down 20K+ for a day's work.

Completely agree.
I equate success in pathology to winning the TV show Survivor. The winners think it is all skill, but luck and circumstance play huge roles.

This is the exact opposite of what I always thought of medicine. I used to believe that medicine was one of the only careers that was a "sure thing". Some docs do amazing, but essentially everyone wins.
Pathology crushed that image for me, but I still think it is true in most other specialties.

 

[PathoIogy]

Many states require public institutions to disclose recent salaries of all employees. You can see what various MDs at many institutions make on various search engines. Here are two that I quickly found where you salaries from UCSF and University of Maryland:

http://data.baltimoresun.com/salaries/state/cy2015/
https://ucannualwage.ucop.edu/wage/

 

[Brahnold Bloodaxe]

Pathology is ultimate example in medicine of the income inequality possible due to situation, personal drive, inherent ability and acquired skill.

Think Professional Actors. A vast majority and I know many, of professional actors with SAG cards (meaning they have and are being paid to act), are completely unable to live on their earnings as an actor. They work other jobs to make ends meet. And when I say vast majority I mean almost all, even those in porn. Then a tiny fraction of those at the top make insane dollars.

What does that tell you about a career in acting?

There are many pathologists that will make less than what a nurse makes today and then will be a tiny minority at the top that will pull down 20K+ for a day's work.

Pathology is just about the last field I'd have expected such a dynamic to exist in. Plastic surgery? Sure. Anything elective and patient facing, ok. But path? Seems to me like the ultimate "commodity" field in medicine, no offense intended, just by nature of providing a "back office" service.

 

[ygdrasil]

Pathology is just about the last field I'd have expected such a dynamic to exist in. Plastic surgery? Sure. Anything elective and patient facing, ok. But path? Seems to me like the ultimate "commodity" field in medicine, no offense intended, just by nature of providing a "back office" service.

Well, in the fee-for-service world, if you provide more services, you get more fees. And levels of service work (specimens signed out, stains interpreted, FISH peered at) vary hugely from practitioner to practitioner. Soon, of course, fee-for-service will be replaced by MIPS and all will be well as we join our comrades in Valhalla for an eternity of feasting and fighting.