In my state, the government jobs that require a Ph.D are very few and far between. The majority just require a Bachelor’s degree. The base salary for these positions are quite low. However, one’s starting salary is typically set at whatever your previous salary was. So if you’re coming over from the private sector making $55K, that’s what your starting salary will be…even though you may be sharing an office with someone with more seniority, who has a similar position, who is only making $45K.
I took me seven years to bump my salary up to a non-embarrassing level. My salary was based on what I made as a poorly paid post-doc, not based on some theoretical “worth” of a Ph.D. If I’d come over from the consulting world, I would have commanded a much higher salary. But my degree would have been irrelevant to this.
But for all the bitchin’ and moanin’ that gubmint workers do about how underpaid they are, there isn’t a lot of turn over. Turns out that salary is just one form of compensation. And job security is nice.
Totally true! Although this is very much not controlled for graduate degrees, family background, etc. But it is true, as I’m sure you know, that a BS in Biology is not particularly marketable, especially outside of research hubs.
even sven, I’m curious to know if the research you’re citing controls for variables such as socioeconomics. I can certainly buy that your average film major makes more money than your average bio major…if your average film maker is also more likely to come from a well-to-do background–one that is rife with the kind of social connections that funnel people to high-paying positions (as well as well-to-do significant others).
I know that first-generation college students are more likely to major in fields like biology than artistic fields. A biology degree will get you a job as a test tube washer nowadays. But maybe this is a pretty decent for someone who’d otherwise be dropping fries at McDonald’s. If a poor student majors in film, what happens to them, on average?
So unless your researchers have controlled for socioeconomics, I’m not quite ready to swallow what you’ve posted.
Not in CS and EE. We’re paying a ton for new PhDs, and there is an incredible in demand in Silicon Valley for them. You have to be from a decent school, but MIT certainly qualifies in that regard. It helps to have an advisor with contacts also.
It helps to be looking for a job in an area with lots of companies competing. I’m not sure Washington DC qualifies for physics.
In my undergrad days, I knew a very bright woman (actually, the “one who got away”). When the subject came to “What to do you want to be when you grow up?”, the answer was always “Professional Student”.
I lost track of her after graduation and she moved.
20 years later, I drove all over the country, including passing through the town where she was last seen.
Still there. Still a student. A 40 year old Student.
A few years later, I googled her rather unusual name. Texas. She was not a Texas girl. She had planted roots back in her college town.
I did the math. She had been on or around that campus for 17 years. This is a large State research school (UoF). She has just gotten her PhD (Psychology). She had done the TA thing there and had published an article or two. Yet, when it came time to find a real job: crickets.
Her best offer was UT Austin.
Did this Phd jack around for 20 years?
Before anyone gets bent out of shape: She died in 2001, age 50. Don’t Smoke.
Absolutely they don’t, which is why it is a fun factoid rather than a piece of career advice. You are absolutely right.
But, it has played out that way in my own household. We have one film major and one biology major, each from equally humble backgrounds, and it’s been up in the air year by year who ends up making more. I think part of it is that film majors tend to be willing to take more career risks, which is a trait associated with success no matter where they ultimately end up.
My household will probably have something that looks like that when me and my SO are done school. She went to art school and is in grad school for design. I’m very practical so I am studying accounting. Even as a CPA though, it will probably be a while before I could match what she makes hourly in her contract work.
DC might be a good area since the government loves to hire PhD people to work on research contracts. For a lot of contracts, you cannot win the contract without having a PhD listed as the leader of the work.
The last time there was a good market for Physics PhDs was probably WWII. Or maybe the space race, if you’re being generous.
Twenty years ago, three quarters of Physics PhDs went and got good jobs in IT, since the actual IT degree industry was still in a growth phase, and a lot of employers were from the era when you couldn’t get an actual IT degree, and a nice hard scientist was a pretty good second best. I would guess that that career path is a lot thornier these days, due to everyone and his dog having at least some IT skills, even if only turning it on and writing Word docs.
We used to say “Physics PhD == Computing Undergrad”. I think it’s slipped back in the rankings since then.
I found that most of the shops would pretty much ignore a MS in Computer Science. The one such critter I did encounter was in a dead-end job in a dying company.
But he DID prove the point of ignoring Masters.
They get too far into the guts of the topic and lose track of “we are here because our employer wants software to, you know, actually run a business!”.
They are great if you want to have a compiler written, but few shops want compilers and they can’t absorb all the MS.
Phds aren’t worth the time invested to money returned ratio. Master’s degrees are marginal for a similar reason. If your friend had a bachelor’s degree in engineering, it would have been 50k. 60-70k with a Master’s. Yes, that’s less money…but every year your friend was in grad school (about 6 years for a physics PhD), that bachelor/master’s guy would be earning 50-70k. By the time your friend graduated, the bachelor’s/master’s guy would probably be making 80k with pay raises and changing jobs, and he would have collected 300-400k in salary over those years.
Not a good investment. I suspect most people never get ahead with a PhD, at least financially.
I don’t think people really understand how to make a lot of money and think “lots of degrees = big cash payout”.
The OPs friend took a job in publishing. Publishing in general doesn’t make a lot of money.
Lawyers make a lot of money ($160k starting after law school) but that’s IF you get a job at a top tier law firm. And that’s a highly competitive “if”. Compensation tends to stay flat for about ten years until you make “partner”. Then you can make salaries around $1M plus profit sharing.
Management consultants also make a lot of money. And a PhD / degree from MIT should be enough to get you a shot at joining McKinsey / Bain / BCG or one of the next tier firms. Those firms also tend to pay six figures.
Investment banks also look for quant guys. And they can get ridiculous bonuses if they’re good.
“Data Scientist” is a hot position right now. Companies are paying people with strong PhD level math skills around $110 to $150 or more to build predictive analytics models.
High tech is kind of hit or miss. For every Google engineer you hear about making $250k plus stock options, there are thousand of developers and IT workers slaving away in “Microserf” jobs in open-plan offices or in the bowels of some corporate back office for average wages.
And of course there is management. You get a job, stay there for 5, 10, 20 years and move to increasing levels of responsibility. The thing that professional students often fail to realize is that short of the “Golden Ticket” careers I mentioned, typically only the top of the pyramid tends to make big money. And you tend to only get there by staying at the same company for a long time and get promoted as companies also tend not to hire you for a higher role than you currently have.
Those aren’t “IT skills”. Those are “I’ve worked in an office or attended a school in the past 20 years” skills.
Yeah, my point is, forty years ago when my dad (a Physics PhD) was going for jobs it was a case of "hmmm … a scientist. I’ll bet you’ve been in the same room as a computer.
Mine paid off very nicely. Plus I loved graduate school, I did something I really wanted to do, I’m a member of the club, and I got to work in Bell Labs on research stuff.
Helps to be in the right field.
Except his employer doesn’t care about how long and hard and important his PhD work was. They care about the job he can do for them. If the job requires a physics PhD and there aren’t many physics PhDs interested in the job, and the employer has a pile of money, and really really needs this particular job done, then you can parlay your physics PhD into a high paying job. If any of those conditions is not met, then you can’t.
Government jobs will usually/always have automatic pay raises for having an advanced degree. Most other jobs won’t, unless you have specific training that they need. Just having a credential doesn’t mean anything unless that credential is directly relevant.
Perhaps your friend might look into the O&G industry. As of last year, the starting salary for a geophysicist with an MS was $90,000 to $110,000. The downside of this is that work locations for new hires is likely to be in Texas.
Also, there are large fluctuations in the oil and gas industry. That 90-110k is nice…but every few years, there’s an oil price crash and you could be laid off for a few years. (the reason for oil price crashes and huge spikes is because demand for oil is very inelastic)