next »

[dr_zack]

Then perhaps you shouldn't be an academic?  Would I really want you teaching my kids, anyway?  Life is short - time is much more valuable than money to me.  I walked away from a $200,000 a year life (with the big house, fancy cars, and fancy things) and have no interest in going back . . . it's meaningless if you aren't doing what you love and are just in it for the dough.  Now I'm making a good living, have great benefits, will have a nice retirement (not that I want to retire, anyway), and love going to work every day and the flexibility an academic life provides.  Perfection!

That is the difference between us. I am willing to jump ship if a company doubles my salary even if I have to work much harder. First, my current job is not easy task either. Second, middle level or middle high level manager job in a company is not that bad at all. Yes, you will have to work harder but you do have many people working for you. Third, if I earn enough money, I can retire early. Fourth, I will not earn Nobel prize by any stretch. So publishing 5 or 10 more papers makes little difference in the long run. But if I have more money, I can have a scholarship named after me.

 

If you mean "reasonable" as in "deserved", then I'd agree.  If you mean "reasonable" as in you think that is a normal salary or that you require this kind of dough to "be happy" than THAT is scary to me.  Also, I;d not work like a slave in some Fortune 500 company -- and deal with all that that entails even for $400,000.  My freedom and flexibility are priceless.
 

But I wouldn't consider a full prof. at Penn to be average.

[/quote]
[/quote]
[/quote]

[tee_bee]

<snip>

4. To compare our earnings to those in other professions, it's important to take the 9 month salary and add 33%. Thus, someone making $40k is theoretically earning at the same rate as someone making a bit over $53k. Of course, theoretical money <> real money. This "summer off" time gives one some freedom.

<snip>

This assumes that (a) everybody on the tenure track actually can afford, in terms of remaining productive in research, to teach in the summer, and (b) that everybody on the tenure track who wants to teach in the summer can actually get a summer contract, rather than those going to much, much cheaper adjunct faculty.

Also, 33%? I suppose there are places where you can make a full 33% of your salary in summer teaching, but I've never worked there. The best I've ever done is 11% for one course. I could have gotten 18% for two or 25% for three or more, but I had no desire to kill my research program and work myself into a nervous breakdown over the course of a short summer term.

I said "theoretical" money, which is not the same as real money. My point is that we should not compare a job with a 9 month contract with a job where 12 months' work (minus what vacation time is offered) is expected. My point had nothing to do with teaching, I am painfully aware that summer teaching doesn't approach parity with regular-year salary, and that in some disciplines (the humanities, for example) there are precious few grant opportunities to cover summer salary. Another way of thinking of this is that the three months "off" (which is not "off," but much more flexible than "real world" jobs) is worth forgoing some income. For some, this is true, for others, it is most assuredly not.

That said, I am growing weary of hearing peer social scientists complain about their "paltry" salaries when (1) some of them could probably raise some summer salary via grants and (2) they earn more in 9 months than median family income in their state or in the whole country. This comment doesn't apply to those who are really being underpaid, and, indeed, applies to a fairly small--but real--subset of academia.

[prephd]

That said, I am growing weary of hearing peer social scientists complain about their "paltry" salaries when (1) some of them could probably raise some summer salary via grants and (2) they earn more in 9 months than median family income in their state or in the whole country. This comment doesn't apply to those who are really being underpaid, and, indeed, applies to a fairly small--but real--subset of academia.

Every time I feel poor, I look at the poverty levels set by HHS. This year, it's about $14,000 for a family of two. I am most assuredly not poor by this standard, which wouldn't even cover my rent for a year.

[neil9]

I do enjoy many parts of being a professor. But I do not think they are perfect or priceless. I am willing to try something else if my salary is doubled.

Then perhaps you shouldn't be an academic?  Would I really want you teaching my kids, anyway?  Life is short - time is much more valuable than money to me.  I walked away from a $200,000 a year life (with the big house, fancy cars, and fancy things) and have no interest in going back . . . it's meaningless if you aren't doing what you love and are just in it for the dough.  Now I'm making a good living, have great benefits, will have a nice retirement (not that I want to retire, anyway), and love going to work every day and the flexibility an academic life provides.  Perfection!

[/quote]
[/quote]

[neil9]

For those who think that 9 months' salary should be multiplied by 12/9 for a comparable corporate salary, note that you do not work for 12 months in a company. My wife is in a drug company and she has one month of vacation every year. So you should only multiply by 11/9 even assuming that you can find summer work.

[tee_bee]

For those who think that 9 months' salary should be multiplied by 12/9 for a comparable corporate salary, note that you do not work for 12 months in a company. My wife is in a drug company and she has one month of vacation every year. So you should only multiply by 11/9 even assuming that you can find summer work.

I don't factor that in because of spring break, Christmas break, and other holidays that non-academics don't get (although, of course, many of us work on those vacations). Also, vacation days are paid vacation in most professional jobs--one's salary does not drop if one takes vacation days. Wage jobs are, of course, different.

FWIW, we don't have paid vacations in academia. YMMV.

[neil9]

I alwyas worked when students are out for Spring Break. Same for winter break.

I do not understand this: "one's salary does not drop if one takes vacation days". If you have a professional job in a company, I see no difference.

I want to add a little about job security. My wife's company was recently bought by another company and she thought she might lose her job. It turned out she will get at least half year of salary if that happens. For people in a higher rank, that can be one year of pay without doing any work. For this reason, some in fact wanted to be terminiated by the company.

I don't factor that in because of spring break, Christmas break, and other holidays that non-academics don't get (although, of course, many of us work on those vacations). Also, vacation days are paid vacation in most professional jobs--one's salary does not drop if one takes vacation days. Wage jobs are, of course, different.

FWIW, we don't have paid vacations in academia. YMMV.

[tee_bee]

I alwyas worked when students are out for Spring Break. Same for winter break.

I do not understand this: "one's salary does not drop if one takes vacation days". If you have a professional job in a company, I see no difference.

If one takes vacation days in a salaried job, one's salary does not change. It's paid vacation. There's no need to adjust academic to professional salaries to account for paid vacation. There are so many variables involved in this comparison that it's best, for a back-of-the-envelope calculation, to just do 9 month salary * 1.333 to get a roughly comparable "real world" salary. As to the working during breaks (as most of us do), if you look at the actual vacation time Americans in salaried jobs are taking versus what they are given, most folks aren't using all their vacation time in any case.

Besides, most academics, in my experience, when moving from a 9 month to a 12 month admin position, will do this adjustment to figure what their salary needs to be. Some institutions may only do the 11/9ths calculation, but that means that they're not offering paid vacation like a "real" salaried position.

[prytania3]

Some prfessors in fact make reasonable money. The website says that a Penn full professor earns $160 (on average?).

But I wouldn't consider a full prof. at Penn to be average.

You'd be surprised. I went to Penn.


But you also have to consider they are paying those Wharton Profs big dough, and Wharton has an undergrad program as well. There's also a school of engineering and applied science, so these schools probably make the average go way up.

[onion]

I work at a large state university in the Humanities, and I make more than two of my friends and one of my former profs, all at Ivy League schools.  However, what some of the Ivies do (that my public university in a high cost-of-living aread can't or doesn't) is provide very nice housing subsidies.  You can't retire on that, though.

[ucprof]

For those who think that 9 months' salary should be multiplied by 12/9 for a comparable corporate salary, note that you do not work for 12 months in a company. My wife is in a drug company and she has one month of vacation every year. So you should only multiply by 11/9 even assuming that you can find summer work.

I respectfully disagree with this viewpoint.  My spouse also works in industry and he has much less flexibility for vacation than I have, working the full 12 months in academia.  While it is virtually impossible for me to take
meaningful vacation during my teaching time, I can easily take time off during the summer and during breaks for vacation, despite working 3 summer months on grants.  We are not budgeted by the month with our time on grants.  I can work weekends, over breaks, longer hours, etc for the funding agency rather than working straight through the summer month, and still bill it as a summer month to the grant.  So if you take into account that a working professional in industry likely works more than a 40 hour week anyway, I think we actually come out ahead with 3 summer months on grants, compared to the modest vacation time that people in industry are allowed.  Moreover my work on the grant can involve travel overseas to visit collaborators and all sorts of flexible time arrangements.  At the end of the day, what the agency cares about is whether you got the work done, not the details of how you budget your time.

There is yet another hidden number no one has mentioned on this thread - consulting days.  At my R1 we are allowed one consulting day per week, even if when we are working straight through the summer funded on grants.  This opens up the possibility of much more income - income that would not be allowed if you worked in industry.  Some profs do quite well - I know one in soc sci who runs a business on the side that has nothing to do with hu's research.  I know another who consults in industry and maxes out on the 1 day per week with a very nice side income.  The best situation is where the consulting gig dovetails with research if you can get it.  Typically consulting does not double the income but it can provide enough in a year for a new car, or kids tuition, or some home renovations after taxes- and this extra help can sometimes make all the difference.  That said you need to budget your time very well if you are doing outside consulting.  And also assume you will be working the 60+ hour week if you want to maintain your research program and whatever teaching you are assigned, while doing a full consulting load.  Typically consulting is more lucrative when you are senior faculty - you have higher stature, can charge higher rates, and more visible in your area, and have job security at the university.  But I've seen junior people do very well with consulting when it connects to their research.

[soymilk]

I ran into a former grad school classmate the other day, who also worked at the same research institute where I worked. I made very good money at the institute, over 85K, but it was a horrible fit and I was miserable.
I now make in the mid 60's, in a social science. I have given up some consulting income while I pursue the tenure track, and I'm not too good with budgeting--so currently trying to figure out how to pay off last month's the credit card bill.
 My former classmate, on the other hand, lost her job at the institute, then held and lost another job on another research gig. She is currently unemployed, in an area with a horrible economy. I didn't even ask about her health insurance situation, but I suspect she needs mental health care that may not be covered right now.
So, the bottom line is that when I look at my situation compared with my classmate, I am so much better off, and there are tons of really qualified people like her out there looking for work. I worked for what I have. However, many of the people out there who are unemployed are smarter, more accomplished, and are more professional looking than I am. So, I am not complaining too much...

[oldfullprof]

Our state college pays new A&S profs about 55K to start, business (and sometimes education [I don't get that one at all]) about 8-10K more.  My associate professor salary (sociology) is about the same as a starting business professor's.

I was making about double my current salary as a hospital director of marketing in the early 90s (adjusted).  So I got a PhD to cut my salary in half.

My wife, at an R-1 in social work, consistently makes about $10,000 more than I do.  She also has a grant which gives her the equivalant of as extra paycheck each month. 

I wrote a textbook, which, I hoped, would bring in a nice chunk of change.  It took two years to write.  It hasn't sold all that well (used books do you in) and I've netted about 5K.

My wife and I each write an article each summer.  She writes an additional one during the year, but I'm too busy.  Neither of us teaches overloads, or summers. 

[ucprof]

@latte - good for you and good luck with the ttrack.  You are doing well it seems and have a bright future.  Your institute ties will serve you well in the long run. 

[klausk]

Also, I'd not work like a slave in some Fortune 500 company -- and deal with all that that entails even for $400,000.

 

Employees at Fortune 500 companies don't work like slaves.

My freedom and flexibility are priceless

What kind of freedom and flexibility do we, academics, have? I think a Subway franchisee has a greater level of freedom and flexibility than we.