“Oh, you’re a scientist? Cool! So you were in school for forever right?”
“Yeah! Pretty much.”
“What do you do?”
“Well, we try to find ways to kill cancer that might be applied to other problems, too. But mostly I just read Gawker all day.”
“Must be bringing in the big bucks then, huh?”
“Ha! No, more like $40k.”
“That’s not a bad bonus.”
“No, not a bonus. That’s what I make.”
“Oh… OH. Wow.”
This was probably the most severe holiday chit-chat interaction I’ve had in my post-graduation days and it made me wonder: Is my job’s perceived monetary inadequacy a consequence of living in an incredibly expensive, money-driven city, or does everyone think that scientists, on the whole, come up short? Are we really underpaid that much? Do people even know?
So, to test this idea inadequately, I wrote a simple, unscientific poll for people on the internet:
1. Do you know what new biomed scientists make straight out of PhD school?
2. How much do (you suppose) they make?
3. How much should they make?
for *full-length version and **other considerations see bottom
And then I dispersed it by internet.
Before we get into the results, a little bit about who probably answered the questionnaire. I tweeted the link a few times to an audience that skews towards grad students, postdocs, and professors in the life sciences. I also posted on a subreddit (survey-specific, largely maintained by marketing undergrads), posted on Google+ (ghost town), and sent it to a few friends in and out of science in Boston, some of which posted on their facebooks. It wouldn’t be too much of a stretch to say many of the respondents were likely in science, or friends/family/fans of science.
To get the most geographical diversity out of this small study, I didn’t send this to people at my work — that would’ve biased the data towards NYC opinion, which is obviously devoid of the economic realities that the rest of the country faces. I also didn’t want to look like an ingrate amongst coworkers, but the cat’s out of the bag, now, guys, I guess! (I actually am happy to have my job, fyi).
In summary, my towering online presence grabbed 83 replies — 38 from people who knew beforehand what postdocs make and 45 from people who didn’t.
For those who do know what postdocs make, the data look like this:
This data was reassuring because it suggests people are probably answering honestly and comprehending the questions, since most get the first salary question right (36-45k).
In terms of what postdocs should be paid, the overwhelming majority think postdocs should make more money, with only 2 who think they make what they deserve (though both of these respondents got the first question wrong), and one jerk who thinks they deserve less.
Since this group is likely to include postdocs or sympathizers (disappointed spouses), it’s unsurprising the majority would like a bit more money — somewhere between 56 and 75k (or about 20k more than they receive, not weighting everything perfectly). Reasonable? Why not?
For those who do not know what postdocs make, the data look like this:
Of those who admittedly have no idea what the deal is in science, only about 30% are in the right ballpark (looking at 36-45k range only). A full quarter think starting scientists make over 66k! Which is not too far off from what the first group think scientists should be making.
Of these people, 36 thought scientists should be paid more. 8 believed scientists are paid what they deserve — probably because they are not busy watching the inactions of Congress. Patriots. And one butt thought they should make less, because since inefficient government is behind science, well then they must be overpaid, right? Right.
More surprising is how much this group thinks postdocs should start at—somewhere in the 76-85k range (mode, but probably near the mean, too, I’m not doing the math). Together, this means most non-scientists perceive scientists as underpaid, but are underestimating the severity! At least this means we’re appreciated! Thanks you guys.
My scientist buddy had a great idea for more detailed analysis: How much does the group that doesn’t know the salary but guessed right think scientists should make? Does it match the first group, who actually knows what they make?
In other words, one might make the argument that these guys don’t know what they’re talking about, since they obviously don’t. However, 13/45 had enough general sense to correctly choose what scientists actually make (36-45k). Interestingly, this “super-rational” cohort thinks scientists should make over 70k (mean), a bit more than what the first group thinks they’re worth.
In conclusion, 65-70k seems like the general public’s ideal magic number for burgeoning biomedical scientists. This kind of confirms what we in science always suspected about being underpaid. I’m feeling the love, general public, just not in my bank account, yet.
*Full version.
A biomedical post-doctoral scientist designs and carries out new scientific experiments in a lab, typically under the direction of a principal investigator at a university or company. Biomedical Ph.D.s may find new ways to treat or understand disease, or carry out behavioral or clinical research. They may also teach students inside of the lab as well as in classes, and may also contribute to writing grants and peer-reviewed scientific publications.
These researchers have usually completed four years of college (B.S.) and five-to-seven years of graduate school (Ph.D.), which includes advanced coursework and the completion of a significant, experimental research project. Many PhDs also have master's degrees and/or relevant industry experience.
1. Do you know how much a typical post-doctoral scientist makes in their first year?
2. If you don't know how much they make, about how much would you guess a post-doctoral scientist makes each year (starting salary, U.S dollars)? If you do know, please fill out the answer, as well.
3. About how much do you think a post-doctoral scientist should make each year (starting salary, U.S. dollars)?
**Other considerations.
The survey didn’t ask respondents to consider health/dental/vision care, contract length, subsidized housing/other perks, or the differences in pay between industry, government, or private positions. At least from what I’ve seen, the difference for most starting postdoc rarely exceeds 5-10k no matter which way you cut it (though, this is anecdotal). Also, given that I was probably only going to get a few replies, I thought it’d be difficult to see any general trends if I got too specific (and less people would be willing to fill out exhaustive surveys). So, like I said, it’s an unscientific survey.
