Are physicists underpaid or is it a misconception?

phys0101

Prior to researching physicist salaries I was under the impression that physicists compared to other occupations e.g. engineers are rather low payed. Though after some browsing I found that physicists, roughly earn ~$85k/year (AUD) and mechanical engineers for instance earn ~$84k/year (AUD).

So are physicists underpaid or is it simply a misconception?

Physical Science Salary (AUD) http://joboutlook.gov.au/pages/occup...ter=&code=2349

Mechanical Engineering Salary (AUD) http://joboutlook.gov.au/pages/occup...ter=&code=2335

Timo

I don't feel underpaid. My salary straight after education phase (-> post-doc salary) equals the national (German) average, and is above the median (~2/3 have a lower salary). Globally, that seems more than okay to me, considering my limited job experience. You can of course always find local comparisons and e.g. wonder why a physician gets twice my salary. But do such local comparisons matter at the end of the day? Only if you're currently deciding which career path to take, I guess. The main problem with physics job is the job prospects (at least if you want to stay in academia or at least in physics research - which is usually the idea behind going into physics in the first place) and, for me even more importantly, the working conditions in academia (e.g. the pressure to move positions and ideally even countries every two years).

Simon Bridge

Welcome to PF;
Those stats are for physicists and engineers who are paid as physicists and engineers.

I don't think anyone is actually saying that physicists are underpaid as such, just that pure science is not a path to riches. All my professors drove beat up cars for instance. There is usually a surplus of supply in degrees that do not lead to a specific job.

The remuneration profiles are so similar - but there are other measures in there. eg. the qualifications distributions are very different. You'll see that you can be employed in the "Industrial, Mechanical and Production Engineering" Industry with an undergrad diploma - and that there are fewer with post-grad qualifications. For "Other Natural and Physical Science Professionals" there is more of an emphasis on higher education. Yet they make about the same amount of money. [edit]Notice that Timo has to get a doctorate to get the German national average pay?

Suggests that if you are a physicist you are more likely to have a higher qualification than but making the same amount as an engineer.

The devil is, as always, in the details, though, and the usual anecdotal stuff suffers from "the grass is always greener" syndrome.
In the end, you don't do physics (especially not in academia) because of the money.

Devils

Thats says "naturral & Physical Scientists" not physicists.

See http://www.seek.com.au/JobSearch?Dat...cs&nation=3000

The jobs seem to be teachers, require Ph.D., or medical physicists (ie creating radiopharecuticals or running machines in hospitals).

phys0101

yeah, the occupation "physicist" links to "Other Natural and Physical Science Professionals", so it must consider other occupations also, though as a rough estimate it should provide some indication.

ThinkToday

It is a bad idea to link all physicists, as if we all do the same things. I can't link our professions salary survey conducted by AAPM for legal reasons. As a medical physicists, we make much more than your link would indicate. A couple of gross numbers from the survey that ignore experience, rank, main work focus, etc. The 2011 AAPM salary survey median MS degree with ABR cert = $176,200, median PhD with ABR Cert = $188,000. The 2011 HPS salary survey for Radiological Health Physics is here http://hps.org/documents/2011_chp_salary_survey.pdf and shows a median of $121,250 for a certified health physicist (CHP).

In summary, "Physicist" is too general a label to assess salaries.

phys0101

Although it may be preferable to have a more advanced degree than a bachelor's to be employed as a medical physicist, what bachelors degree is preferable? e.g. physics or biophysics?

ThinkToday

Preferable is a relative thing. Preferable money, research, free time, etc.? I do more fulfilling work as a medical physicist, but I had more fun as a health physicist. I make much more money as a medical physicist. I busted my butt as a health physicist during outages, and I sit on my ever growing butt too much as a medical physicist. As a health physicist, I had peers to share the load and responsibility, and as a medical physicist 100% of the load and responsibility rest with me.

So, preferable how?

Lastly, unless it's changed HP is the only one you can do without a graduate degree.

phys0101

Preferable, as in, would you be more likely to be employed as a medical physicist with a physics degree or with a biophysics degree?

ThinkToday

Medical physics requires a Medical Physics graduate degree. There are a few programs which have lumped medical physics in with biophysics. However, to get certified (which will generally be required for a job in the US) you need to go to a CAMPEP approved program http://www.campep.org/ These are medical physics graduate schools that satisfy the standards required to site for ABR medical physics board examinations. Medical physics also requires a two year residency in a CAMPEP approved residency program.

BTW, I corrected my earlier post. Health Physics is the only one you can do WITHOUT a graduate degree. http://www.hps.org/

halifax12

physicists are overpaid if you take in consideration the hard work in Mechanical Engineering

twofish-quant

It's a misconception, but one that is based on some fact. Permanent physics positions pay well, but Ph.D.'s that go the academic route end up spending a lot of time in "temporary" positions (i.e. post-docs) that pay poorly. The problem isn't the salary but the lack of positions.

Then you have to deal with the fact that most people with physics degrees don't get jobs with "physicist" in the job title. Some physics Ph.D.'s go into investment banking, which has quite high salaries.

Choppy

I think what Phys0101 is asking is if someone is considering medical physics as a final career, which undergraduate program would be prepare the candidate the best for entry into an accredited medical physics graduate program.

To that I would answer it really depends. There is no standard undergraduate biophysics program (or standard undergraduate medical physics program for that matter). Generally when we assess candidates who apply to our graduate program, we look at the courses that they've taken. We look for core physics and mathematics courses. One of the risks of more specialized programs is that they can have watered down versions of a more typical physics undergraduate degree as these students end up struggling with our comprehensive exam. I generally advise students not to specialize too much at the undergraduate level.

And now back to your regularly schedualled thread.

Choppy

Something else (back on topic) to consider is that when you look at the data on employment of people who've gone through an undergraduate physics programs the median salaries tend to be quite similar to the various branches of engineering - finishing about middle of the pack. When you look a little more closely, the standard deviation for physics grads is considerably wider and this is because, in my opinion, engineering is a more tightly regulated profession. Physics is just an academic subject.

Another factor to consider is that engineers typically begin work after their undergraduate degree. People who become "physicists" - which has a fairly broad definition - go through graduate programs and spend time in temporary post-doctoral positions. So when you look at something like career-integrated earnings, engineers will come out on top because they start earning the salaries associated with their profession so much earlier.

phys0101

Under the prospects tab it is stated:

How many workers are employed in this occupation? 9800
How many work full-time (% share)? 85
What are the weekly earnings for full-time workers ($ before tax)? 1630/week
How does unemployment compare with other occupations? low
What is the long-term employment growth - 10 years (%)? 94.7
What is the medium-term employment growth - 5 years (%)? 172.3
What is the short-term employment growth - 2 years (%)? 63.9
Is the mix of industries favourable for employment growth? very favourable
Gross replacement rate – how many (%) leave the occupation each year? 5.9
What is the vacancy level for this occupation? very high
What is the likely future employment growth for the next five years? strong growth

So these statistics suggest physics graduates will enter a field with favourable employment growth, high vacancy and relatively high pay. (Although other occupations are considered in the above statistics)(these suggest somewhat similarly http://www.graduatecareers.com.au/ca...ical-sciences/)

Regarding Simon Bridge's post, although one should not enter physics for the money, my concern was that someone with an interest in physics may avoid physics due to lack of money, even though it may not be the case.

ThinkToday

Didn't know you are Aussie. I'm assuming you are since the job statistics site you linked is there. I have no idea what the market or requirements are there. However, you keep linking "physicists" as if we are all the same. Global statistics like those are, IMO, useless. Pick a physics career field to discuss for better answers.

phys0101

I was referring to physics generally as I have been led to believe it can be difficult to be employed in a specific field of physics, not really sure if that's the case. If you could provide some insight into the employability of physics graduates from your knowledge/experience (presumably in the US) it would be appreciated.

(not sure which fields are easiest to be employed in, maybe someone could shed some light.)