Median salaries for U.S. life scientists increased 7 percent between May 2000 and May 2001, but women earn nearly one-third less than men, according to a survey completed by the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
By comparison, real average weekly earnings for all U.S. workers rose 3.6 percent, seasonally adjusted, between August 2000 and August 2001, suggesting that salary increases within the life sciences sector continue to outperform raises for many other jobs.
The AAAS survey of 19,000 life scientists describes current compensation trends and identifies key issues affecting job satisfaction among researchers. Completed as a service for members of the non-profit AAAS, the world's largest general scientific organization, the jobs survey should prove useful to university administrators, corporate personnel directors and others working to improve recruitment and retention of U.S. life scientists.
An analysis of the findings, included in the 12 October issue of the AAAS weekly journal, Science, describes the survey as "the largest and most comprehensive examination yet attempted of salaries and job satisfaction among life scientists in the United States."
Life scientists are clearly among the nation's top earners: In August 2001, real average earnings for all U.S. workers--based on payroll reports from private, non-farm establishments--stood at $490.54 weekly (about $25,508 annually), according to U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) statistics. Last year, an evaluation of average annual pay to all U.S. workers covered by state and federal employment insurance programs set the average higher ($35,296 in 2000).
In contrast, the AAAS reports, academic life scientists are earning median salaries of $80,000 in 2001, while non-academics report salaries with a midpoint 20 percent higher than their academic counterparts-around $96,000.
|
But, male life scientists in academia earn median salaries that are 32-percent higher, on average, than salaries for women ($94,000 versus $72,000), and the gap tends to be even larger in non-academic settings. The AAAS is careful to avoid attributing women's lower pay to discrimination, noting that "this difference is explained, at least in part, by the fact that more males are further in their career cycle, have worked longer, and are in the high-income field of medicine." Female life scientists also tend to work more often in academia, which pays less.
Still, for physicians and executives, the gender-difference can be large: Male CEOs and VPs in non-academic settings earn around $160,000, versus $125,000 for women. Male physicians outside academia earn $130,000, whereas women make about $90,000. The AAAS recommends further study to learn more about such differences, noting that conclusions about pay for females in the highest-ranking jobs are based on a relatively small number of respondents.
|
Two-thirds of all married or previously married female life scientists (67 percent) report that their spouse's or partner's career has limited their career "at least a little"--and one-fourth (27 percent) say their career goals were impacted "a lot." Yet, only 7 percent of men in the field say that their spouse's career has limited them to any significant degree.
Moreover, among men who took a leave of six months or more for personal, medical or family reasons, nearly half (47 percent) say their employers made provisions to facilitate their return, whereas only 30 percent of female life scientists report such support. More than a third of women scientists who took leave (37 percent) say they feel it limited their career "a lot," and 39 percent say it limited them at least a little. Among men, only 11 percent report significant career impacts due to family leave.
Who earns the most in the life sciences field? The AAAS reports these median salaries for academic versus non-academic life scientists:
* Medicine, $145,000 for academics, or $140,000 for non-academics;
* Pharmacology, $98,000 and $110,000;
* Biotechnology, $63,000 and $100,000;
* Cancer biology, $85,000 and $88,000;
* Immunology, $84,000 and $88,000;
* Neuroscience, $80,00 and $92,000;
* Biochemistry, $71,000 and $92,000;
* Genetics, $75,000 and $90,000;
* Microbiology, $70,000 and $83,000;
* Cell biology, $68,0000 and $85,000.
Other highlights of the AAAS Jobs Survey of U.S. Life Scientists include:
* Academicians who are administrators or full professors earn about $112,000 and $108,000, respectively, while non-teaching research personnel earn approximately $42,000. Associate professors make an average of $72,000; assistant professors earn $62,000; and adjunct instructors, $43,000.
* Among non-academic life scientists, CEOs and vice presidents earn most ($153,000), followed by physicians ($125,000). Directors and assistant directors make about $115,000; managers earn $90,000; principal investigators, $97,000; scientists, $86,000; and research investigators, $76,000.
* Job satisfaction among life scientists increases with age, years working, and career stage, and those with an M.D. or multiple degrees (M.D./Ph.D.) report higher job satisfaction than their less educated peers.
* The value of personal contacts is recognized as critically important by current and past post-doctoral research associates. When asked to indicate the single most important factor that helps them land their first permanent job, 38 percent pointed to personal contacts. Opportunities to co-author papers and to present research at conferences are seen as the next most valuable factors (24 percent and 18 percent, respectively).
What makes life scientists happy on the job? Survey respondents crave intellectual challenge and the freedom to make their own decisions, the AAAS confirms: 79 percent rated intellectual challenge as "highly important," while 70 percent gave top marks to autonomy and flexibility in decision-making. Salary and compensation were further off researchers' radar: 53 percent describe money as a top concern, no more important than geographic location.
"These findings suggest that life scientists will sacrifice pay, benefits, prestige and lifestyle to have the opportunity to fully utilize their scientific skills in pursuit of knowledge and discovery," the AAAS survey concludes.
METHODS: The AAAS jobs survey was mailed to some 19,000 life scientists. A 46-percent response rate was achieved, and 8,692 useable responses were assessed. Some 87 percent were Caucasian, and 72 percent were male. Asian respondents represented 7 percent of the total, while 3 percent were Hispanic, 1 percent were African American, and 1 percent were scientists of Native American or Alaskan Native ancestry. Most (86 percent) were employed full time. Respondents covered at least 30 sub-disciplines, from medicine and genetics, to agricultural sciences, ecology, pharmacology, bioinformatics and marine biology.
Founded in 1848, AAAS serves as an authoritative source for information on the latest developments in science and bridges gaps among scientists, policy-makers and the public to advance science and science education.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
The results of the AAAS salary survey will be available for free to AAAS members through a fully searchable database at the AAAS members-only website, www.aaasmember.org, after the embargo lifts at 2:00 p.m. U.S. Eastern Time Thursday, 11 October 2001.
An analysis of the survey will be freely available to the public at http://www.sciencecareers.org after the embargo lifts. Journalists may contact Ginger Pinholster, 202- 326-6421, gpinhols@aaas.org, for more information.
Contact: Ginger Pinholster, AAAS, 202-326-6421 / gpinhols@aaas.org; or Lisa Onaga, AAAS, 202-326-7088, lonaga@aaas.org
Journalists: Please cite http://www.sciencecareers.org after the embargo lifts
Journal
Science