next »

[onion]

The salaries are very low.  They are similar to retail management which requires no degree. 

Thanks for pointing this out.  This is exactly the kind of tact and charm I've come to expect from HR "professionals".

[sciencephd]

Wait a minute...that phrase contains an obvious oxymoron.

[madhatter]

The salaries are very low.  They are similar to retail management which requires no degree. 

Thanks for pointing this out.  This is exactly the kind of tact and charm I've come to expect from HR "professionals".

We're doing tact and charm on the fora now? Was that part of the redesign?

[ucprof]

It depends on the field.  It's only a 9 month salary so if you are in a field that typically earns summer salary you add 10-30% to that.  In my area starting ttrack for 9 months at R1s is anywhere from 60-90K.  60 would be very low since the top `postdoc' positions are around 60 for 9 months and 90 would be high - but not out of the question for a high cost of living area.  Then if you are research active you should get grants and add 10-30% on top of that depending on how many summer months you get on the grant.  NSF has a cap on two months, but DoD, NIH, etc can go up to 3 months.  On top of that if you are very entrepreneurial you can consult on the side and earn more money.  Folks I know who consult start at $100/hr (asst prof) and go up to $250/hr or more for full prof with international reputation.  Most R1s let you consult 1 day/week on average, which is a lot on top of a full time job but some people do it.  You can easily buy yourself a new car on consulting income if you max out on that, but consulting income is very hit or miss and often involves short term project-based contracts.  And it's a big distraction from research.

Still the starting salaries are low, even in sciences/engineering compared to industry.  The national labs start in the low 6 figures.  But the big difference is that when you are full prof you make more at a top R1 than you would with the same yrs of experience in a national lab.  And you can still consult on top of that.  I had one good consulting year when my total gross income was about twice what a similarly experienced colleague makes at LANL or LLNL (I am full prof at top R1).  But that year was not typical of my usual take home pay. And when you consult you are working literally all the time, if you want to maintain your research program at the same time, and keep up with teaching etc.  Also the difference between govt lab vs. R1 prof pay at the full professor level is basically the summer salary.  In my dept the 9 month salaries of full profs are comparable to 12 month salaries for same level in govt.  So you have to bring in summer salary to really see the difference. 

[dr_zack]

This is just silly to say (see below)!  It VERY MUCH varies by discipline and institution. 

I've been in retail management and I'm making $35,000 a year more now as TT faculty (Assistant Prof) than I did there, and $20,000 a year more than I did as a non-profit program manager (and I'm at a mid-sized public institution). Not to mention that I have a flexible schedule, opportunities to earn extra money by teaching in the summer and/or during intersession, and through publishing, grants and consulting.  There are other less tangible benefits too, like being able to dwell in the world of theory and practice, and working on a college campus -- which is an atmosphere I love.

Going into an office every day and working a 9 to 5 (or 9 to 9) sounds like torture to me.

Obviously, people in, say banking or a tech field can make much, much more (as you can in a variety of other careers), but I'd not trade my schedule flexibility and summer options for an extra $100,000 a year, and loving what you do is priceless.

The salaries are very low.  They are similar to retail management which requires no degree. 

Why so low??  Also, with no other financial benefits - bonuse, stocks, etc...why is it so competitive for tenure track positions? 

[canadatourismguy]

In academia you trade money for freedom...

[reener06]

Also factoring in is the fact that a lot of new PhDs are going into their first salaried job (there is another thread about this). This usually means that 1)they don't know how to negotiate, and many still think of themselves as grad students, so they are intimidated by the power differential when negotiating with deans or chairs and 2)they've been living at or near the poverty level and/or with loans for quite a few years; 30K sounds like a good deal to some of them.

While that latter example may be extreme--I hope--I know friends who have taken the first amount offered by a chair or dean, and have been intimidated to ask for more. Then they start their jobs and realize that other faculty who did know how to negotiate are making a lot more and sometimes teaching less. I think grad schools are getting better about preparing faculty for this. I also think some universities take advantage of this inexperience  of new hires. And with the economic crisis combined with the glut of PhDs in many fields, room for negotiation has become narrower.

I would submit this is one reason that has kept professor salaries low for a long time.

[venerable_bede]

We're doing tact and charm on the fora now? Was that part of the redesign?

Yes, but they don't work when you click on them.

[jonesey]

As another example of how salary varies, today's Job section has an ad for a TT English prof at a CC in Louisiana:  $31,000/year starting. 

[cranefly]

Yes, flexibility is the big pay-off. I used to work 9-5, as I'm sure many academics have now (the myth of going straight through school to a job without ever working in the "real world" is less and less common). I hated working 9-5.
Now, sure, I get paid less, but I also get to take afternoon naps. I get up when I want. I go shopping when I want. I make haircut appointments when I want. Nobody follows up with me. I don't punch in or out. I do my job, and I do it well, and I'm left alone and paid a living wage.

[pournelle]

Another thing to keep in mind is that, in my experience, a surprising percentage of profs either have independant sources of income and/or spouses who make significantly more. At a minimum, the class origin of most professors shapes attitudes towards money. I can count the people in my humanities field whose parents were working or even lower-middle class on one hand.

[monita]

Another thing to keep in mind is that, in my experience, a surprising percentage of profs either have independant sources of income and/or spouses who make significantly more. At a minimum, the class origin of most professors shapes attitudes towards money. I can count the people in my humanities field whose parents were working or even lower-middle class on one hand.

Really?!  Dangit.   I'm trailer trash with a spouse who likes working for NGOs.  I picked the wrong field - we're doomed.

[msparticularity]

Yes, flexibility is the big pay-off. I used to work 9-5, as I'm sure many academics have now (the myth of going straight through school to a job without ever working in the "real world" is less and less common). I hated working 9-5.
Now, sure, I get paid less, but I also get to take afternoon naps. I get up when I want. I go shopping when I want. I make haircut appointments when I want. Nobody follows up with me. I don't punch in or out. I do my job, and I do it well, and I'm left alone and paid a living wage.

Well, people do follow up with us, in my experience--it's just that they expect us to produce results rather than watching to see if we look busy between 9 and 5.

[hipgeek]

Another thing to keep in mind is that, in my experience, a surprising percentage of profs either have independant sources of income and/or spouses who make significantly more. At a minimum, the class origin of most professors shapes attitudes towards money. I can count the people in my humanities field whose parents were working or even lower-middle class on one hand.

Really?!  Dangit.   I'm trailer trash with a spouse who likes working for NGOs.  I picked the wrong field - we're doomed.

I know pournelle's tone might sound a bit classist here, but I agree that upbringing can certainly shape attitudes about money and I also agree that many working-class kids don't go into the humanities.  It often just doesn't seem like a practical, viable option.  And when a person grows up worried about the basic necessities of life, practicality becomes a very serious concern. 

I grew up very poor myself and most of my real friends are working-class and the great majority of them have not finished and may never finish bachelor's degrees, even as they are entering their thirties.  Also, I've never recognized class and class difference so much as when I began to work my way up into advanced degrees at the university.

That said, the pay of a professor does seem like a living wage to me and the flexibility in terms of day-to-day scheduling is a nice bonus.  I also like the variety.  I may teach the same classes every semester but I always see new students and can make course adjustments here and there when I want some refreshing change.  The corporate world doesn't seem to offer these kinds of important perks.

[riptide]

If you want to stay in an academic setting and make money, be a basketball coach or football coach.

At my university, they are paid millions and are the HIGHEST paid people in the university....yup above the president and provost.

It's all about sports.