Too many Hempath fellowship?

[mrjames]

Do we need so many hematopathlogy fellowship programs? Colse to 80 programs, more than 100 fellows each year. Where are the jobs for these fellows? Any comments?

79 programs matched your search criteria
http://www0.ama-assn.org/vapp/freida/pgmrslt/1,1239,,00.html

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Pathwrath]

Well those bone marrows diffs and crappy research projects aren't going to finish themselves.

Or maybe you expected the academic attendings to do them?

They don't get paid enough.

 

[2121115]

Do we need so many hematopathlogy fellowship programs? Colse to 80 programs, more than 100 fellows each year. Where are the jobs for these fellows? Any comments?

79 programs matched your search criteria
http://www0.ama-assn.org/vapp/freida/pgmrslt/1,1239,,00.html

As a soon to be hemepath fellow, I'll say this - no, we don't need so many fellowships. However, you can say that about any fellowship in pathology other than dermpath. In fact you can say that about the whole field of pathology. When it comes to fellowships the same principles apply that apply to pathology in general, namely get good training and learn to become an effective consultant. Then you might get a good job.

 

[Gut Shot]

Do we need so many hematopathlogy fellowship programs?

You tell us. How does 79 compare with historical numbers? What is the aggregate demand for hematopathology fellows?

 

[yaah]

You tell us. How does 79 compare with historical numbers? What is the aggregate demand for hematopathology fellows?

You don't understand! Anecdotal evidence trumps any real data, you should know that by now.

 

[106174]

As a soon to be hemepath fellow, I'll say this - no, we don't need so many fellowships. However, you can say that about any fellowship in pathology other than dermpath.

We are seeing this problem in dermpath too, so NO field in pathology is immune to this.

The tone in our (pathology) forum is so negative it is scary. Nowhere in SDN is a specialty more plagued by a poor job market problem than ours. I frequent the dermatology and radiology forums and they never talk about having problems getting jobs. And I bet the primary care specialties don't either.

 

[Path or bust]

We are seeing this problem in dermpath too, so NO field in pathology is immune to this.

The tone in our (pathology) forum is so negative it is scary. Nowhere in SDN is a specialty more plagued by a poor job market problem than ours. I frequent the dermatology and radiology forums and they never talk about having problems getting jobs. And I bet the primary care specialties don't either.

so what constructive things can be done?

all I really see is whining and more whining.

 

[2121115]

so what constructive things can be done?

all I really see is whining and more whining.

As the famous quote says, "Things are bad. And they will naturally only get worse."

 

[KeratinPearls]

We are seeing this problem in dermpath too, so NO field in pathology is immune to this.

The tone in our (pathology) forum is so negative it is scary. Nowhere in SDN is a specialty more plagued by a poor job market problem than ours. I frequent the dermatology and radiology forums and they never talk about having problems getting jobs. And I bet the primary care specialties don't either.

Check out the oodles of jobs. Radiology OWNAGE.

http://www.radworking.com/jobs/radiology-jobs.html

 

[Gut Shot]

Check out the oodles of jobs. Radiology OWNAGE.

One of my brothers is a radiologist, and the grass is always greener. He makes good bank, but he works his ass off. Nights, weekends, holidays, you name it. Also, they have had serious erosion of their reimbursements like everyone else, and are suffering encroachment from other specialties. High tech imaging equipment has been getting cheaper and cheaper, and it is falling into less and less skilled hands.

In his group, partners forgo some salary but take a share of the annual bonus. He's been on partnership track, but for the past couple of years the bonuses have been slashed to reinvest funds and keep the business competitive. He actually made more his first two years than he has since.

Rads has some important lessons for our field. Back in the late 1990's the market for radiologists was terrible... I mean awful. The turnaround occurred for a couple of reasons, partly because a bunch of burned out older radiologists retired (sound familiar?), but also because demand skyrocketed. Imaging crossed a threshold of speed and cost and overnight the number of studies ordered went through the ceiling.

I agree that training slots should be reduced (by my calculations to 371 per year), but that's only part of the solution. We need to develop and embrace new tests and new technology that will improve patient care and keep us indispensable.

 

[earmuff]

I agree that training slots should be reduced (by my calculations to 371 per year), but that's only part of the solution. We need to develop and embrace new tests and new technology that will improve patient care and keep us indispensable.

Amen brother

 

[106174]

so what constructive things can be done?

all I really see is whining and more whining.

I am writing a CAP resolution but I am not sure how far that can and will go. But for whatever it is worth, I am doing it. I basically will ask them to form a committee that will look into the job market closely, and hopefully come up with data that will back up our contention that we are producing way too many pathologists.

But whining is not all bad. Keep pounding our generation with this discussion and when we all assume positions of leadership, then maybe things will change. Hopefully, by then, it will not be too late to turn things around.

 

[exPCM]

BigD, good luck with your efforts.

 

[KeratinPearls]

I am writing a CAP resolution but I am not sure how far that can and will go. But for whatever it is worth, I am doing it. I basically will ask them to form a committee that will look into the job market closely, and hopefully come up with data that will back up our contention that we are producing way too many pathologists.

But whining is not all bad. Keep pounding our generation with this discussion and when we all assume positions of leadership, then maybe things will change. Hopefully, by then, it will not be too late to turn things around.

Good to see someone being proactive. If you need help, I'm sure many, including myself, are willing to lend a hand or a voice.

 

[Path or bust]

I am writing a CAP resolution but I am not sure how far that can and will go. But for whatever it is worth, I am doing it. I basically will ask them to form a committee that will look into the job market closely, and hopefully come up with data that will back up our contention that we are producing way too many pathologists.

But whining is not all bad. Keep pounding our generation with this discussion and when we all assume positions of leadership, then maybe things will change. Hopefully, by then, it will not be too late to turn things around.

awesome, thanks for sharing.

 

[Patholo-gyst]

BigD, let us know how your resolution is going. I know that we have a few people in my program who would be willing to sign such a resolution with you!

We need to protect ourselves somehow, or at least make sure people are informed about the situation . . .

 

[yaah]

I was just talking to a neurology fellow who was complaining about jobs. Their complaint wasn't necessarily finding a job, it was finding a job that was worth taking (i.e., partnership, good salary, not covering 5 different hospitals and running around, reasonable amount of call) in the right area. In other words, similar to some complaints we hear here. So there are complaints in every field - when you focus on one primarily, you tend to ignore problems in other fields while emphasizing the good points. A pediatrician might say that pathologists should stop complaining since their max starting salary is very low for what a pathologist's starting salary would be.

This is not to say that none of the complaints here are valid - they are very valid complaints - it is just to say that the statement that other fields don't have problems is untrue. It doesn't help our argument to make claims about other specialties that aren't true. Everything in medicine has problems these days that are only going to increase. Bear in mind that many of these advertised jobs for high salary for radiologists or whatever are not necessarily good jobs either. A high salary isn't everything, especially when that doesn't include anything like malpractice or whatever. I'm sure many of them are good jobs - there is a high current demand for radiologists.

 

[exPCM]

1) No other specialty has had a group like the tripod group:
http://members.tripod.com/~philgmh/CIPJM.html

2) Pathology -Current resident count per ACGME = 2321
Neurology - Current resident count per ACGME = 1721
http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/

Pathology - Current job posting on medhunters website = 92
Neurology - Current job posting on medhunters website = 240
http://www.medhunters.com/


I think that there is no doubt that the pathology job market is worse than that of any other specialty.

 

[yaah]

I think that there is no doubt that the pathology job market is worse than that of any other specialty.

You guys keep twisting my statements to imply that I am arguing the reverse of your opinion (maybe you're not, but that is the implication I keep getting because of certain statements which get ignored and others which get responses). And many also continue to keep implying that I am arguing that the job market is rosy. Nowhere above did I say the pathology job market isn't worse than any other specialty. I don't know if it is or not. I know it could be better. But what I did say is that to imply things are great elsewhere (or 10x better than pathology, or pick a number) is not only self-serving but inaccurate. I also said that while there are more jobs in other fields, they may not be good jobs or ones that people really want. Great. There are 240 neurology job postings. How many are what a neurologist would consider to be good jobs? How many of the pathology job postings are? How many unadvertised neurology positions are there? How many unadvertised pathology positions are there? Is medhunters a good site for neurology jobs but a bad site for pathology jobs? Is it the other way around? To me, the data you posted are somewhat informative but I cannot draw nearly the dramatic conclusions that many here continue to draw.

As far as there being no other group than tripod, well, tripod hasn't been updated in almost eight years. So there really isn't a pathology group like the tripod group either. What happened to them? Were they silenced by thugs? Or did they all land good jobs and stop caring? They are just fortunate to have their website located on a site that doesn't really care if it hangs around in perpetuity - a lot of websites would be purged after 8 years of inactivity. Their data is now woefully out of date. Whether it is relevant now is an argument that can be had, but I think we need to stop using it as an argument. A lot of things have happened in eight years, just like the anesthesia job market went from putrid (far worse than pathology is now, for example) to excellent to now somewhere in the middle. And now they are threatened by CRNAs and megacorporation groups that contract with hospitals and underpay anesthesiologists. Now, you can take this to mean the job market is great in anesthesia or you can realistically admit that there are problems there also. To argue that one specialty's problems are worse than another is a bit interesting but not entirely that relevant, especially when pathology salaries continue to exceed those of many others and work hours and malpractice premiums continue to be less than many others.

So no one twists my argument again, I am not implying that there is not a job crunch in pathology. My argument continues to remain that there are too many unqualified and poor candidates (for various reasons be they technical skills, communication skills, work ethic, whatever) out there finishing residency. There are too many residents and fellows entering the job market, fine, I can believe that argument, although I don't buy the argument that all the major pathology organizations are completely delusional on this topic. So it is a confusing subject which warrants more study and questioning, but to be honest I've had enough of people taking anecdotal evidence and running with it since my own anecdotal evidence says the opposite. My other personal experience is that I had an excellent and productive job search with many opportunities.

 

[Gut Shot]

1) No other specialty has had a group like the tripod group:
http://members.tripod.com/~philgmh/CIPJM.html

"This page was last updated on 01/30/2001"

2) Pathology -Current resident count per ACGME = 2321
Neurology - Current resident count per ACGME = 1721
http://www.acgme.org/adspublic/

Pathology - Current job posting on medhunters website = 92
Neurology - Current job posting on medhunters website = 240
http://www.medhunters.com/

Internal Medicine - Current resident count per ACGME = 22,284
Internal Medicine - Current job posting on medhunters website = 657

We're going to have to do better than this.

 

[exPCM]

"This page was last updated on 01/30/2001"



Internal Medicine - Current resident count per ACGME = 22,284
Internal Medicine - Current job posting on medhunters website = 657

We're going to have to do better than this.

Try Again:
1) only about 20 percent of IM residents are going into general IM (most go into cards, GI, pulmonary etc.) see: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/39779.php
2) The 22,284 figure you cited includes multitudes of transitional and prelim medicine residents going into fields like radiology, ophthalmology, dermatology, radiation oncology, anesthesiology, etc.
The article I cited just above lists 2668 categorical medicine residents per year x 20% going into general IM =
534 general internists graduating per year!
This is less than the 657 general internists jobs posted on the medhunters website.
Also many general internists take jobs as hospitalists and there are an additional 309 hospitalist jobs on the medhunters website.

So overall we have 534 general internists graduating and we have available 657+309= 966 jobs posted on a single website. The situation makes the pathology job market look even more dismal by comparison.

3) The tripod members are no longer updating the website and I never claimed otherwise. I stated that "no other specialty has had a group like the tripod group". This is just a marker of how poor pathology workforce planning has been.

Fred Silva and his minions will claim that evidence of a poor pathology job market is anecdotal when the truth is that Fred Silva's claims that the job market is good appear to me to be completely anecdotal. I think the SurgicalPathology Atlas website is a reasonable reflection of reality: http://www.surgicalpathologyatlas.com/glfusion/article.php?story=2008081219491958

 

[Gut Shot]

Try Again:
1) only about 20 percent of IM residents are going into general IM (most go into cards, GI, pulmonary etc.) see: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/39779.php
2) The 22,284 figure you cited includes multitudes of transitional and prelim medicine residents going into fields like radiology, ophthalmology, dermatology, radiation oncology, anesthesiology, etc.
The article I cited just above lists 2668 categorical medicine residents per year x 20% going into general IM =
534 general internists graduating per year!
This is less than the 657 general internists jobs posted on the medhunters website.
Also many general internists take jobs as hospitalists and there are an additional 309 hospitalist jobs on the medhunters website.

So overall we have 534 general internists graduating and we have available 657+309= 966 jobs posted on a single website. The situation makes the pathology job market look even more dismal by comparison.

You miss the point. My invoking of internal medicine training numbers versus the number of available jobs on medhunters.com was an obviously flawed and asinine proposal. I did it to illustrate that invoking pathology training numbers versus the number of available jobs on medhunters.com is... an obviously flawed and asinine proposal.

3) The tripod members are no longer updating the website and I never claimed otherwise. I stated that "no other specialty has had a group like the tripod group".

So your contention is that no other specialty has ever had a subgroup of practitioners who were vocal about supply and demand issues within the field.

Look, the job market may suck, I'm not disagreeing. But the evidence put forth thus far wouldn't stand up in a 7th grade science fair. We've got anecdote, hearsay, incomplete statistics, gross leaps in logic, and an eight year old website.

Like I said, we're going to have to do better than that.

 

[Art]

According to an authoritative site, the average Chair of Pathology in Boston earns $51,000.00 per year. The website was updated on December 1, 2008.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Chair+of+Pathology/l-Boston,+MA

That seems like a pretty low salary, even lower than a resident's salary. Isn't Boston an expensive place to live? Why would someone work for a salary that low? Maybe it is not that difficult to be a chair, and they can work another job part time?

 

[Gut Shot]

According to an authoritative site, the average Chair of Pathology in Boston earns $51,000.00 per year. The website was updated on December 1, 2008.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Chair+of+Pathology/l-Boston,+MA

That seems like a pretty low salary, even lower than a resident's salary. Isn't Boston an expensive place to live? Why would someone work for a salary that low? Maybe it is not that difficult to be a chair, and they can work another job part time?

I don't think I'd label simplyhired.com as an authoritative site. It lists "dental assistant" and "patient escort" as job titles related to "Chair of Pathology."

Here's an exercise. Find the average Chair of Pathology salaries in various large California cities according to your site, and then compare them to actual 2005 numbers published for the UC system.

 

[Gut Shot]

Maybe it is not that difficult to be a chair, and they can work another job part time?

"An unnamed Chair of Pathology in New York City works double shifts to make ends meet."

 

[earmuff]

According to an authoritative site, the average Chair of Pathology in Boston earns $51,000.00 per year. The website was updated on December 1, 2008.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Chair+of+Pathology/l-Boston,+MA

That seems like a pretty low salary, even lower than a resident's salary. Isn't Boston an expensive place to live? Why would someone work for a salary that low? Maybe it is not that difficult to be a chair, and they can work another job part time?

This is laughable... I can guarantee you our chair makes about 8X this salary.

This forum hits a new low on (almost) a daily basis now.

 

[Art]

I don't think I'd label simplyhired.com as an authoritative site. It lists "dental assistant" and "patient escort" as job titles related to "Chair of Pathology."

Here's an exercise. Find the average Chair of Pathology salaries in various large California cities according to your site, and then compare them to actual 2005 numbers published for the UC system.

It looks like the site is pretty accurate. When you look at the official, published salaries for teachers in North Carolina the average salary is about $43,000.00
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/fbs/finance/salary/schedules/2008-09schedules.pdf

The Simply hired website has North Carolina teacher salaries at about $43,000.00 also
http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-teacher

So the question still remains, why are pathology chairs paid so poorly?
Is there a glut of pathology chairs on the market, so that the salary is low because of competition?

 

[earmuff]

So the question still remains, why are pathology chairs paid so poorly?

No, the question doesn't remain. They aren't.

 

[djmd]

It looks like the site is pretty accurate. When you look at the official, published salaries for teachers in North Carolina the average salary is about $43,000.00
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/fbs/finance/salary/schedules/2008-09schedules.pdf

The Simply hired website has North Carolina teacher salaries at about $43,000.00 also
http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-teacher

So the question still remains, why are pathology chairs paid so poorly?
Is there a glut of pathology chairs on the market, so that the salary is low because of competition?

That site uses word matches to get that information (and if you click on it it clearly includes lots of jobs that are not just Pathology positions, let alone chair positions.)

 

[yaah]

Pathology chairs are not paid poorly. To take as "evidence" some random website's claim that the average is $51,000 without any explanation of what they mean by "chair of pathology" or anything else is not only laughable, but raises serious questions about your reasoning skills. As far as academic salaries such as those of chairmen being reported as low, this is not that surprising - perhaps the institution only needs to contribute that much of their salary and the rest is funded by multiple grants or whatever. I know of several academicians who have a published salary of $0.

Back to that tripod thing again - part of my point was how do you know that no other specialty has had a group of people put up a basic and rarely updated website complaining about jobs? As I said, this one was lucky enough to be hosted on a server that ignores it and allows it to exist. Others could have not been. As Gutshot said, you are going to have to do better than this. 9 year old data and anecdotal stories are far, far from adequate for convincing anyone of the need for a significant policy change like residency program reduction.

 

[Gut Shot]

It looks like the site is pretty accurate. When you look at the official, published salaries for teachers in North Carolina the average salary is about $43,000.00
http://www.ncpublicschools.org/docs/fbs/finance/salary/schedules/2008-09schedules.pdf

The Simply hired website has North Carolina teacher salaries at about $43,000.00 also
http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-teacher

So the question still remains, why are pathology chairs paid so poorly?
Is there a glut of pathology chairs on the market, so that the salary is low because of competition?

When I look at the average salary for a Chair of Pathology in San Francisco, simplyhired lists it as $56,000.

Then I check the actual numbers from the UC system:
Base salary: $126,490
Total compensation: $387,410

Oh, here's some more simplyhired.com average salary fun:

Chair of Radiology $32,000
Chair of Surgery $34,000
Chair of Internal Medicine $53,000

I guess we're not doing too bad!

 

[djmd]

When I look at the average salary for a Chair of Pathology in San Francisco, simplyhired lists it as $56,000.

Then I check the actual numbers from the UC system:
Base salary: $126,490
Total compensation: $387,410

Oh, here's some more simplyhired.com average salary fun:

Chair of Radiology $32,000
Chair of Surgery $34,000
Chair of Internal Medicine $53,000

I guess we're not doing too bad!

Art is just worried because he already makes on average $60,000

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-art

 

[earmuff]

Art is just worried because he already makes on average $60,000

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-art

 

[djmd]

I have been amusing myself typing in single words and seeing what results I can get..

The average salary for money jobs is $61,000. Average money salaries can vary greatly due to company, location, industry, experience and benefits.

Job salaries vary quite a bit based on color too...
Yellow 36k, Maroon 45k.
Quick pays 63k, but Slow? 76k.

Fascinating

 

[yaah]

The average salary for "Doctor" is $57,000. Although that increases to $65,000 for "physician". However, "physicians" (plural) is only $60,000 and "doctors" is $49,000. It starts getting better if you're a "doctor physician" ($68,000). Clearly this site is an excellent reference.

It's amazing the careers they have in there. You can be a "Man at arms" for $50,000. "Heman"s average $44,000.

 

[earmuff]

The average salary for "Doctor" is $57,000. Although that increases to $65,000 for "physician". However, "physicians" (plural) is only $60,000 and "doctors" is $49,000. It starts getting better if you're a "doctor physician" ($68,000). Clearly this site is an excellent reference.

It's amazing the careers they have in there. You can be a "Man at arms" for $50,000. "Heman"s average $44,000.

The president-elect took a paycut in this awful economy...

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-obama

 

[djmd]

Sadly evil does pay more than good...
Jedi 63k, Sith 89k.
Good 47k and evil 54k

 

[TypicalTuesday]

I'm getting ripped off...it says Typical Tuesdays make 54K....so where's my check?

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-typical+tuesday

edit:
But what I meant to say is that, clearly this site is authoritative and we should quit arguing. Plus, this is fun!

 

[Nilf]

Hm... "Small ass" will earn you 41K, while "Fat ass" 61K. Obese employees rejoice!

Interestingly enough, 'Small breasts' and 'Big breasts' pay the same: 39K.

Counterintuitive, methinks.


http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-small+ass

 

[Gut Shot]

I wonder if we'll ever see Art again.

 

[pathstudent]

I am writing a CAP resolution but I am not sure how far that can and will go. But for whatever it is worth, I am doing it. I basically will ask them to form a committee that will look into the job market closely, and hopefully come up with data that will back up our contention that we are producing way too many pathologists.

But whining is not all bad. Keep pounding our generation with this discussion and when we all assume positions of leadership, then maybe things will change. Hopefully, by then, it will not be too late to turn things around.

There is no hope for that.

Academic centers are attendings are way too dependent on resident labor to function. Who would organize their slides, gross their specimens, order their special stains, call clinicians for them, look up patient history? Academic pathologists are incapable of performing any of those activities.

Moreover, now that academic centers are trying to compete with reference labs and private groups for outpatient cases, they need even more residents. Plus producing even more pathologists helps them out as if there are more and more people finishing training every year, there will be more and more people for them to hire at 130K a year to sign out their cases.

Ophthalmology, urology and other professions strongly restrict the number of professionals to ensure their scarcity. However, that is not the case in pathology as residents are needed as cheap labor.

 

[exPCM]

Pathology chairs are not paid poorly. To take as "evidence" some random website's claim that the average is $51,000 without any explanation of what they mean by "chair of pathology" or anything else is not only laughable, but raises serious questions about your reasoning skills. As far as academic salaries such as those of chairmen being reported as low, this is not that surprising - perhaps the institution only needs to contribute that much of their salary and the rest is funded by multiple grants or whatever. I know of several academicians who have a published salary of $0.

Back to that tripod thing again - part of my point was how do you know that no other specialty has had a group of people put up a basic and rarely updated website complaining about jobs? As I said, this one was lucky enough to be hosted on a server that ignores it and allows it to exist. Others could have not been. As Gutshot said, you are going to have to do better than this. 9 year old data and anecdotal stories are far, far from adequate for convincing anyone of the need for a significant policy change like residency program reduction.

How can someone prove to you that no other specialty has had such a group?
It is hard to prove that something does not exist. I say that sasquatch does not exist. Can you prove that sasquatch does exist? I challenge you to prove that another group in another specialty similar to the tripod group does exist or has existed? If so why is there no evidence on the web or elsewhere of such a group?

As far as anecdotes, those who say the job market is good have the words of Fred Silva and anecdotes only.
There is the "anecdotal" experiences of numerous attendings on this site
as well as the complete paucity of job postings (not anecdotal) to indicate otherwise. Radiology residents are solicited by recruiters frequently, pathology residents rarely. Pathology is certainly not in the top 15 recruited specialties in 2005 or 2007 (see data not anecdotes http://www.merritthawkins.com/pdf/2007_Review_of_Physician_and_CRNA_Recruiting_Incentives.pdf http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb4365/is_/ai_n29235182)
How do you explain that?
You guys are going to have to do better than just parrot Fred Silva.

 

[yaah]

You guys are going to have to do better than just parrot Fred Silva.

No, because you are the one advocating change. This is not how change works. The onus is on the one advocating drastic changes (like residency # reduction) to present adequate data to support such a position. The onus is not on the status quo to prove otherwise unless the data and momentum is in the other direction (which apparently organizations do not think). As I have said numerous times, I am not the one you have to convince, although I and others here might be a good start so that you can flesh out your argument before having it shot down for lack of coherency. I also said I would support your position if you can get more real, tangible, and legitimately currrent data. For example, in the ASCP job market survey, they say that job offers are increasing, 87% (I think) of people "looking for a job" get a job offer (whatever that means), and that half of new hires have a starting salary >$150,000. You can look at that in any number of ways, but I can tell you that the national organizations do not see that data and say we need to cut residency slots. And they do not need to prove to you their position unless you can raise a compelling argument.

Pathology organizations say that the job market is both good and improving. They are using similar data as you to draw opposite conclusions. They also say that the need for pathologists continues to grow and that pathologists are going to be retiring. You may think these arguments are weak and flawed, but they do not. You have to convince them that they are. If you go up to them and say, "prove to me the job market is good," they are either going to ignore you or are going to give you the same data and ask for your rebuttal. And your rebuttal had better not be, "There aren't that many job postings" or "I know of a guy who can't find a job."

 

[Art]

According to an authoritative site, the average Chair of Pathology in Boston earns $51,000.00 per year. The website was updated on December 1, 2008.

http://www.simplyhired.com/a/salary/search/q-Chair+of+Pathology/l-Boston,+MA

That seems like a pretty low salary, even lower than a resident's salary. Isn't Boston an expensive place to live? Why would someone work for a salary that low? Maybe it is not that difficult to be a chair, and they can work another job part time?

Well that original website (simplyhired) was probably not authoratative, as people suggested. But a July 2009 showed that half of the top ten earners at a hospital in Greenwich CT were pathologists.
http://www.greenwichtime.com/ci_12872069

That article also quoted a salary survey by Allied Physicians Inc. which said that pathologists make $169,000 in the first year, and a maximum of $610,000 with at least 3 years of experience. That seems like a pretty good salary.

 

[112641]

There is no hope for that.

Academic centers are attendings are way too dependent on resident labor to function. Who would organize their slides, gross their specimens, order their special stains, call clinicians for them, look up patient history? Academic pathologists are incapable of performing any of those activities.

Moreover, now that academic centers are trying to compete with reference labs and private groups for outpatient cases, they need even more residents. Plus producing even more pathologists helps them out as if there are more and more people finishing training every year, there will be more and more people for them to hire at 130K a year to sign out their cases.

Ophthalmology, urology and other professions strongly restrict the number of professionals to ensure their scarcity. However, that is not the case in pathology as residents are needed as cheap labor.

Its fascinating to me that pathologists are the only set of attendings who take advantage of their residents like this. All other specialties have such little use for residents that it doesn't help them make more money or have more time for research or whatever else they do. I wonder what altruistic quality path attendings miss that seem to filter out in Rads, ophtho, urology etc.

I think medicine in general may very well be a sinking ship, and pathology may be on one of the first decks to submerge. But when posters keep quoting data so old that would be completely unrecognizable in a autopsy suite it's really hard to get fired up.

 

[112641]

Fred Silva and his minions will claim that evidence of a poor pathology job market is anecdotal when the truth is that Fred Silva's claims that the job market is good appear to me to be completely anecdotal. I think the SurgicalPathology Atlas website is a reasonable reflection of reality: http://www.surgicalpathologyatlas.com/glfusion/article.php?story=2008081219491958

This is what you link to show that there are no job offers? This is an empty thread on a site where the last post to ANY forum was in February. This is really becoming laughable, if I don't actually imagine some of you guys as collegues of mine. Then it becomes disturbing.

This specialty is supposed to be one filled with people who respect and gather good evidence to back up research and the advancement of medicine. I think Yaah was being complimentary when he compared the data to 7th grade level.

Again..I find myself far from disturbed that some of the posters here and their aquaintances can't find good work.