Ph.D Chemist Salary in Industry

[coldplay32]

Hi all,

Recently I saw the chart below showing us the average ph.d chemist salary in US. Is it reasonable? It seems really high for me. 

another website shows that the average is $64,000, which makes me confused. 

If you know the general standard, could you help me to set up the general average? Thanks. 

 

[Chai_latte]

The problem with the ACS survey is that an insanely small percentage of people responds.  The participation rate rarely exceeds 10%, if I remember correctly.  As a result, these numbers are inflated...very inflated.  I don't know a single BS chemist making 70k or 80k in a lab.  Numbers like that just aren't normative (though they do exist).   

 

Edited September 4, 2015 by Chai_latte

[coldplay32]

The problem with the ACS survey is that an insanely small percentage of people responds.  The participation rate rarely exceeds 10%, if I remember correctly.  As a result, these numbers are inflated...very inflated.  I don't know a single BS chemist making 70k or 80k in a lab.  Numbers like that just aren't normative (though they do exist).   

 

Thanks, Chai.

Then what about the salary of chemist with Ph.D? Is it too high also? A few of my friends got about $95000 after graduation I think, but I think those friends got the paycheck higher than the average. 

[TakeruK]

Are these numbers the median salary for new hires or the median salary of all employed chemists? 

I have seen survey data of graduates from my school-- the salaries that coldplay32's friends got is typical of the chemistry PhD graduates here that go into industry. 

[Chai_latte]

I'm fuzzier with PhD salaries.  The people whose salaries I can at least ballpark are either post-docs or tenured profs.  I don't know my industry PhD friends' salaries.  

Actually, that's not true...one guy is about 95k.  So, your friend's income sounds about right.  Other than that, I don't know salaries.

@takeruk- this is for all ACS members, so new hires and experienced chemists.  But, their surveys have been criticized.   

 

[Eigen]

Depends a lot on the field, the job, and the location. 

I know friends in Analytical with 120k+ starting salaries. 

The page you posted is the median of all jobs, not new hires, and is reasonably correct. The more detailed report (and it is very detailed) from ACS on employment and earnings also breaks it down by years experience. 

Also, to note, a response rate of around 10% is pretty average for this type or survey, and is still a statistically relevant size when you consider the number of members. You get similar data from the employment reports from the federal government. 

Average salary is also pretty useless, as the field to field variations are so high. You really only need to know the salary range in your field, for jobs you have he background for. 

[Chai_latte]

@ Eigen- I can't quibble with the PhD numbers.  As stated before, I don't really know them.  But, the BS/BA...do you know chemists making that kind of money?  In the northeast, I definitely don't.  How about your area?  Aren't you out west or southwest?

[Chai_latte]

Also, to note, a response rate of around 10% is pretty average for this type or survey, and is still a statistically relevant size when you consider the number of members. You get similar data from the employment reports from the federal government. 

But, the difference here is that not all chemists belong to ACS.  The argument is that the folks who have allowed their membership to lapse may be on the lower end of the salary scale (or could have left the field entirely).  They're not included.  And then, of the ACS members, the response rate is 10-15% depending on the year.

My question is (and I don't know if this info is out there): what percentage of trained chemists belong to ACS?  

Edited September 4, 2015 by Chai_latte

[coldplay32]

Depends a lot on the field, the job, and the location. 

I know friends in Analytical with 120k+ starting salaries. 

The page you posted is the median of all jobs, not new hires, and is reasonably correct. The more detailed report (and it is very detailed) from ACS on employment and earnings also breaks it down by years experience. 

Also, to note, a response rate of around 10% is pretty average for this type or survey, and is still a statistically relevant size when you consider the number of members. You get similar data from the employment reports from the federal government. 

Average salary is also pretty useless, as the field to field variations are so high. You really only need to know the salary range in your field, for jobs you have he background for. 

Thanks,

As a student preparing for Ph.D degree, I am curious about the starting salaries, and 120k+ seems really high for me, and I don't think it is reasonable to all students. But I also think that $64000 as a starting salary introduced by a different website is not reasonable as well. I assume about 90~100K is the general starting salary for the ph.d student. Do you agree with that? Is there any other place in which I can find general statistics for the starting salaries for ph.d chemistry student? 

[Vene]

At a Midwestern Fortune 500 I used to work for entry level PhD chemists made around $70-80k starting. I would expect that the salary would be higher on the coasts, so hitting $90-100k wouldn't surprise me.

And I wouldn't take the ACS numbers seriously, it's such a skewed sample.

[Eigen]

Thanks,

As a student preparing for Ph.D degree, I am curious about the starting salaries, and 120k+ seems really high for me, and I don't think it is reasonable to all students. But I also think that $64000 as a starting salary introduced by a different website is not reasonable as well. I assume about 90~100K is the general starting salary for the ph.d student. Do you agree with that? Is there any other place in which I can find general statistics for the starting salaries for ph.d chemistry student? 

Like I said, you need to be more specific. 

Both $64k and $120k can be perfectly accurate, depending on field and experience. 

The vast majority of professional chemists belong to ACS, and as I said, their salary/employment estimates usually jive pretty well with what the Bureau of Labor reports for this subsection of professionals. 

For people I know that went to work with BS degrees (getting a professional job with a Chem BA (non ACS certified) is very hard), $60k+ starting was what I saw (Low CoL South/Midwest), with a fairly quick salary rise after a few years of training. 

But someone doing analytical QA at a water testing center (for instance) is going to get paid a lot less than someone doing pharma QA in the northeast. 

An "average salary for a PhD Chemist" is about as useless of a number for someone entering the field as I can think of. Your work experience before and during the PhD will matter, as will your specific skill set, where you're applying, and what industry you're going into. 

Also, if you're using ACS sources, you should probably use the most up-to-date (2014) vs the older (2012). Trends are also more important than numbers. Even as the sample isn't perfect (hint: no sample is) the relative proportion is constant, and ACS data over time is very good for seeing salary trends. 

https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/careers/salaries/cen-salary-article.pdf is the 2014 report.

I also particularly like Chemjobber's blog, and he has a good breakdown of some salient points from the report (http://chemjobber.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-full-2014-acs-salary-survey-is-out.html). 

Response rate in 2014 was 23%, down from 35%in 2012. You can quibble with who is or isn't an ACS member, but a 35% response rate is damn good for any survey.

[coldplay32]

Like I said, you need to be more specific. 

Both $64k and $120k can be perfectly accurate, depending on field and experience. 

The vast majority of professional chemists belong to ACS, and as I said, their salary/employment estimates usually jive pretty well with what the Bureau of Labor reports for this subsection of professionals. 

For people I know that went to work with BS degrees (getting a professional job with a Chem BA (non ACS certified) is very hard), $60k+ starting was what I saw (Low CoL South/Midwest), with a fairly quick salary rise after a few years of training. 

But someone doing analytical QA at a water testing center (for instance) is going to get paid a lot less than someone doing pharma QA in the northeast. 

An "average salary for a PhD Chemist" is about as useless of a number for someone entering the field as I can think of. Your work experience before and during the PhD will matter, as will your specific skill set, where you're applying, and what industry you're going into. 

Also, if you're using ACS sources, you should probably use the most up-to-date (2014) vs the older (2012). Trends are also more important than numbers. Even as the sample isn't perfect (hint: no sample is) the relative proportion is constant, and ACS data over time is very good for seeing salary trends. 

https://www.acs.org/content/dam/acsorg/careers/salaries/cen-salary-article.pdf is the 2014 report.

I also particularly like Chemjobber's blog, and he has a good breakdown of some salient points from the report (http://chemjobber.blogspot.com/2014/09/the-full-2014-acs-salary-survey-is-out.html). 

Response rate in 2014 was 23%, down from 35%in 2012. You can quibble with who is or isn't an ACS member, but a 35% response rate is damn good for any survey.

Thanks for sharing such an valuable info with us. That makes much more sense. ( 2014 data ) I was surprised as I think, $64000 vs $120 is a huge difference. (double amount!) 

[Eigen]

For reference, a starting salary in the midwest in a DoD lab for a chemist is mid-80s. National labs are similar.

[Chai_latte]

My error...the 16% response rate was for a different 2014 ACS survey (new graduates only).

http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i26/New-Grad-Salaries-Employment.html

 

 

[Eigen]

My error...the 16% response rate was for a different 2014 ACS survey (new graduates only).

http://cen.acs.org/articles/93/i26/New-Grad-Salaries-Employment.html

I think ACS has a lot fewer members in the new graduate arena than in established chemists- I think a lot also depends on field. In the pharma fields, it's expected that you're an ACS member. Every company does major releases, hiring and networking through the conferences. Other fields, less so.

It's one of the reasons ACS has been trying to reach out a lot more to students/recent grads for membership- they end up being the ones that benefit the most.