The ugly truth of the engineer/scientist enmity crashes in upon Ogre

The BBQ Pit
1

Working subtitle: “You wanna pay me how much?”

Folks, I don’t bitch about a whole lot. Normally, I keep my temper on an even keel. But this is just too goddamn much. I think I not only have a right to a good, cleansing bitch here, but also to a full explanation (which I’ll never get,) and possibly even the still-pulsing heart ripped fresh from the ribcage of a writhing engineer.

In case any of you don’t know precisely what I mean by the “enmity between scientists and engineers,” in my experience, it can be summed up thusly: contempt. Engineers generally consider scientists to be fuzzy-minded theoreticians, and scientists generally consider engineers to be narrow-minded automatons. OK, so there’s the background.

In case you didn’t pick up on it, I’m a scientist, and this is a job-related rant.

Normally, I wouldn’t even bother with such narrow categories, and just take everyone on their own merits, regardless of philosophy yadda yadda yadda blah blah fucking blah. However, I’m forced to think of my co-workers in terms of scientist and engineer, because those are the classifications we fill by reason of our education, and our employer keeps our status firmly in view all the time.

I work for a state environmental enforcement agency, and in short, if you ain’t an engineer, you ain’t jack shit. I have a master’s degree in something that sounds like a filler word on Star Trek, I’m a published author, and I have years of experience under my belt, yet the salary range for a beginning scientist (because of the peculiarities of state hiring policies, it doesn’t matter if you’re Albert-Monkeyfucking-Einstein, you start at the bottom of the pay scale. Period. There is no consideration for experience) is pathetic. I started out at $10,000 less than the brand new, wet-behind-the-ears engineer fresh from his bachelor’s program.

Needless to say, I was pissed. I spent a godawful number of years in school, and most of the engineers in question don’t even have their PE (Professional Engineer) status. In fact, several have repeatedly failed the goddamn test! I had to pass oral and written comprehensive exams! I had to submit and defend a thesis. What did they have to do? Learn to run a fucking graphing calculator.

Did I mention that I do the exact same thing as they do in my job? Did I also mention that most of the engineers with whom I work would have difficulty drumming up enough intellectual power to be a decent fireplug? Did I mention that there’s literally not ONE GODDAMN THING any of these yahoos do that I can’t do?

Did I mention that it doesn’t seem to matter a tinker’s damn?

There are other issues too. We scientists get the inner offices, while the engineers get the outer, window offices. The engineers get a Department-sponsored appreciation dinner every year. Do we? Nope. We don’t get shit.

To add insult to injury, our Departmental director just approved an across-the-board raise for…scientists? Hell no! That’s right, the White Hats win again, damn them (and the administration) straight to Hell.

Yes, I’m trivializing engineers’ qualifications by generalizing. Please keep in mind that I’m doing it for effect. I’m sure there are plenty of wonderfully qualified, intelligent engineers out there. I just don’t happen to work with any of them, and the Department’s administration seems to think that every engineer must, by definition, be a pwecious widdle flower.

You know, when I took this job, I was desperate for money. Everyone I knew said, “Ooooo! Get a state job! You’ll be set for life!”

If only they fucking knew.

2

Ogre –

I feel your pain, my brother. I’m on the consulting side of the environmental industry, and it’s much the same on this side of the table. On the pay scale, engineers are the highest, followed by geologists and then scientists. I have no idea what the rationalization for the difference in pay scales is, but in most of the consulting firms I’ve worked for, the rates for geologists and scientists have been around 5-10% lower than for engineers performing a similar task. But it sounds like the problem is exacerbated by you being in the public sector rather than the private. To have one class (engineers) treated that much differently than another (scientists) is just plain stupid.

Sounds like it may be worth your while to put in some time there to build your resume, then go over to the private side - there’s plenty of room in industry and consulting for talented, intelligent folks who’ve already published and have technical knowledge under their belt.

3

It sounds like your job sucks. But I agree that, in general, scientists are under-respected and under-paid.

I’m an engineer for an environmental consulting firm (perhaps we’ve crossed paths?). My experience (with one company) is that engineers do get paid a bit more than scientists. My impression/assumption is that this is a result of market-ability. In general*, engineers design stuff to build (i.e., positive/direct economics) whereas scientists conduct research (i.e., uncertain/indirect economics). This does not seem to apply to a state job where there is no profit motive, but I assume that the state is trying to offer competitive salaries so all their engineers don’t leave for private industry jobs.

    • But that’s a whopping generalization. I agree that, in reality, there is a lot of cross-over in what scientists and engineers actually do.

FWIW, experience does count for a lot, at least where I work. Senior scientists are well paid and have corner offices, etc. But one annoying thing about being an engineer/scientist in a private environmental company though…in the upper ranks, a masters degree in business will bring in better pay than strong scientific/technical knowledge. It seems like the longer a scientist/engineer stays in the environmental biz, the less actual science/engineering he/she will do. The focus shifts to business development & marketing. ick. For every well-paid technical guru, there are 10 better-paid business-minded managers who used to be scientists/engineers.

4

Yeah, that’s all I had to learn as an engineer. :rolleyes: I can count on two fingers the number of people I’ve met who can do my job.

Look - I understand that you are ranting and upset, so I’m not going to pick a fight with you. And I’m not trying to denigrate your experience, or be snitty towards you at all. You deserve to be upset, based on what you relate here. The line quoted above just bothers me to no end, though. That’s all.

We’ve had several people with advanced degrees come in and try to do my job. They were all hired at a much higher salary than I was, because “I have an MS/PhD, no way am I a loser!” Well, they all were losers - every last one of them. Their education and personality focused them so much they were unable to deal with interpersonal relations with clients, handle sudden and catastrophic changes to projects, negotiate contracts, and handle the phone call at home that says get on a plane now and get to this power plant. They could not for the life of them understand why everyone was in such a hurry, and why communicating with the clients - the people paying our bills - was so important. They almost seemed flustered at having to be flexible, to be able to do so many different things. So they all quit. And we don’t hire them anymore.

Perhaps one of the reasons the engineers are paid more is that they could get their PE. Although I agree that failing the test multiple times should result in them being paid no more than you. So this should not be relevant.

Now I will use your thread for a counter-rant:

I also have a 4.0 GPA in my Masters program - but no thesis. I got this GPA on 11 courses by taking them at night after fucking work and on the weekends - not staying at school and running a lab for undergrads. That’s right - I worked 60 hours a week and still got a 4.0 on my classes. I haven’t seen anyone else that can claim that. But I am looked down - even scorned - by the “elite” scientists who have their MS - because 33 hours sans thesis in their eyes puts you somewhat below despicable. It’s not my fault that my graduate advisor retired, and no one would do a thesis with me in my topic at the entire fucking University, but hey!

I see during preview that Phobos posted. There is a very good point in that post - get your MBA. You will skyrocket up the salary scale at a better company. This works.

5

Infraggable Krunk - Thanks for the sympathy. This job is very much a resume-builder. I was in a bad spot when I took it, and I’m starting to get crazy-legs to get out of here.

Phobos - Thank you for the condolences. I suppose it’s possible that we’ve crossed paths. Geographically speaking, where do you work? I’ve done work in the deep South and in the Washington, DC area.

Agreed, wholeheartedly. One other thing abouty a state job (or this state job, at any rate) and engineers. The only thing remotely technical they have to do is review design schematics. They do not have to design, build, or brainstorm anything beyond the ken of any of the scientists working here. In fact, my technical expertise (he said modestly :)) is quite a bit superior to almost any of the engineers here.

Anthracite - Don’t let it upset you. After all, I specified later in my post that I was generalizing for effect. In no manner was my rant intended to apply to engineers beyond the confines of the state agency for which I work. For the record, though, note my response to Phobos. In this line of work, there is literally no call for an engineer to do anything beyond review some occasional specs. This, again, applies only to my own narrow little workplace, and should not be taken as a rant against all engineers everywhere.

Tell you what. If you forgive me for overgeneralizing, I’ll forgive you for using that damned infuriating rolleyes smiley on me. :slight_smile: Put 'er there?

This, I believe, is more of a reflection on your personal perseverance than any basic deficiency in people with advanced degrees. Some people are simply more flexible and committed than others, and I admire you for being one of the good ones, but I’m not convinced it’s (only) a result of their educational backgrounds. But hey, I’m not in your shoes.

Yoohoo! Over here! :slight_smile: This described me throughout my college career. Sometimes I worked two jobs and went to school at the same time (which is, admittedly, what you’re describing.)

Re: MBA:

More school? Not right now, although it’s always a consideration.

A friend of mine (a business consultant) and I are considering starting to do business-related environmental consulting. Between us, I believe we have plenty of expertise in both sides of the business.

6

I am finishing grad school in physics, however I started my undergraduate career in engineering and I actually agree that engineers should have a higher starting salary if they are doing the same job.

I think this because engineers have a bit more of a standardized education. If an engineering graduate is any good then there are some things an employer is pretty much guaranteed that the engineer should be able to do. This is not necessarily so for other science grads and it might take them a while to catch up in some specific areas. Once the science grad has proved themself however the pay should be comparable. If your institution doesn’t do this, they have a problem recognizing quality. Sorry about that Ogre.

I remember a couple of years ago there was a push by the Candian Association of Physicists to get a “Professional Physicist” designation similar to the PE because physicists were finding that engineering associations were pushing to reduce the amount of things physicists were legally allowed to do. I don’t know the status of that now.

As far as comparison of intelligence between engineers and scientists, I’ve observed that it’s about the same.

7

Graphing calculator? Shit. I hadda learn to use a damned slide rule. Still do occasionally just to toy with my interns.

8

Hee hee hee…I was waiting for UncleBeer to show up in this thread and wallop you a good one with his moneybags…

9

First, I’m an enginerd both by degree and job experience. I’m making more now doing a monkeys job as a consultant doing SQA for a tech company than I did as an Industrial Engineer finding ways to improve my old companies capacity by 33% in 6 months. But I digress.

So, second, two very good friends of mine have their Doctorate or Masters in Molecular Genetics and Biology. They make, literally, 3/5’s what I do. It astounds me. They are off doing genome and stem-cell research and I’m recording test-scripts…I’m not saying I think I shoud be making less money, just that they should be making more.

It comes down to the market. Scientists don’t make money. Presumably, you are a scientist because you enjoy what you do, much like teachers and cops, so paying you well for the benefits you provide is not as important. Engineers do hard work with numbers and drafting and stuff. There is a respect in the title of engineer, because people know that it is something specific and difficult to achieve. Scientists, OTOH, just kinda do something or another with chemicals or beakers or caged monkey, but who really knows?

The people that hire scientist, the companies that hire them, have different budgets and structures than the ones that hire engineers[sup]*[/sup] and those budgets are usually more exploratory/research oriented than the ones engineers draw on, which are based in profitable results. Rather than working in a field that regularly produces product or substance that people pay for, scientists work in a field where people pay money in the hopes of solving problems or finding something new.

IMO, but I’m fading into a lunch coma, so forgive the absolute and wild generalities.

If you are doing the same work as engineers and they are making more than you, why wouldn’t the company just hire more scientists to do the engineers work and save money all around?
*: wild speculation and theory, aka: WAG

10

Crap. Am I getting that predictable in my grouchy old age, Uke? I guess I’ll just down my can of warmed Ensure, take out my teeth, and shuffle off to the charpoy. Anybody got a warm brick for the foot of my bed?

Damned kids.

11

I have BOTH Engineering and Science degrees. This enables me to Hate Myself.

I use a Slide Rule, too. I keep a lot of them around the house. MilliCal is going to learn how to use one, even if she ends up using a souped-up fully integrated biocomputer embedded in her skin.

12

After giving this a little more thought, the only justification I can see for giving an engineer more dough than a comparable geologist/scientist is for the potential for certification. Example: I do a lot of Illinois UST and VRP work, and for submittal to IEPA, many reports have to be accompanied by an IEPA form which has been certified and stamped by an Illinois-registered PE. I can understand requiring a PE certification for something like a design for a remediation system or other package requiring things like piping design, etc., but for site investigation and remediation? To me, a professional geologist certification would be just as valid in that situation, but at least in Illinois, they don’t quite see it the same way.

But that justification’s a little weak - IMHO, a job position should be compensated according to the job responsibilities, not necessarily the degree a person attained.

BTW, does anyone know of any certifications for environmental scientists that are comparable to the PE/PG/CPG type of certs?

13

::raises hand and shouts “ooooh, oooh”::

I got a 4.0 in grad school. This was 33 credit hours, 8 hour comps, Journal acceptable professional paper with full literature review - 50+ pages (Degree didn’t “offer” thesis option") that had to be defended. (ain’t that just like a thesis?) All while I was working full time as a teacher. Those who think teaching is a 7 hour day and that’s it may stop reading now; you’ll never get it.

The weekend schedule was:
Saturday - grade labs for AP Chemistry, AP Physics and other honor chemist classes, prepare lesson plans.
Sunday - All grad school stuff, reading, writing papers, projects, the like.

Yeah, I worked my ass off for my 4.0. Mrs. Spritle and I put off having children until I was finished because there would be little chance of me being the father I wanted to be.

The result? I got my degree and a pay increase. As a teacher with 7 years experience and a Masters Degree (NOT a masters equivalent) I was due to make $35,500. IN THE DC/BALT AREA!

I laced up my walking shoes.

On to the disparity between Engineers and Scientists. Yes, there are attitudes. I got my BS in Chemistry, alongside many BS Chem.Eng. students. We felt that we were better because we studied the truth, the theories, the purest form of the science. They felt that they were better because they put our work “to use”. Who’s right? both, neither. As a scientist, I can say that without the research and groundbreaking work of scientist, the engineers whould have right little to apply.

With a BS in Chemistry, I would work as a bench chemist for a Ph.D Chemist or a Chemical Engineer.
With a BS in Chem. Eng, I would manage a team of BS chemists.

I love the line in “Wierd Science” or whatever the movie was with a young Val Kilmer as an extrememly bright young lad with a penchant for partying. The boys had just built a Bajillion Megawatt LASER and were celebrating when Lazlo Hollyfield (the smartest person in the world) asked them what it could be used for. One of the group responds, “Leave that up to the engineers.” It really shows the different views that the groups have of each other.

Ogre, brother, listen to some Johnny Paycheck. :wink: Then pound the pavement.

14

You think the disparity between engineers and scientists is bad - you should try working in a law firm. I have a Ph.D. in engineering and have passed the patent bar. On our current salary schedule, it takes nine years to be paid as much as a 25-year-old kid fresh out of law school. On the other hand, the firm bills my services for roughly twice what his go for.

The good part is that they will also send me to law school, so I’ll pass up the snot-nosed kid soon. But for those who don’t decide to go to law school, it’s a huge disparity. They must be making a mint off of us, considering our billing rates and our salaries.

15

I hear ya ENugent I was looking at employment opportunities on the NASA website.
Compare scientists and engineers to lawyers!

16

The movie is called Real Genius. :slight_smile:

17

First off, the movie is Real Genius.

Secondly, they don’t have their PE? I’m an undergrad in engineering, and as much as the thing is talked up, not having one is a big fat statement of “I have no clue” so at that point one is essentially a scientist. (kidding, kidding, why are you staring at me like that?)

As much as I’d like to curl around moneybags and growl, equal pay for equal work is just one of those truthful statements. Sorry it sucks.

18

sigh. Watch the engineer apply. They eventually drum stupidity out, don’t they? Of course, my other major probably puts it back in, so I guess I’m stuck. Sorry folks.

19

If it makes you feel any better, I’ll be losing my windows to some monkey-fucking (I like that one!) salesoid soon. But I have spent so many years in the bowels of various offices that I keep the shades shut. Just used to not knowing what time it is and what it’s like outside.

20

Offices?? I’m an engineer - fairly senior. I share a cubicle with 2 junior engineers and a technician. Our cube is beside a window, but the cubicle walls block the window up about 5 feet. Oh well, my plants get the occasional glimpse of daylight. Also, I’m a civil servant, hence the minimalistic environment. No biggie - it’s a job… <sigh>