Engineering Salaries Over the Years

The median engineering salary is about $80,000 in the US.

The median salary for a doctor is about $180,000.

However, an engineer can get his "ticket" and start collecting a salary in about 4 years.

A doctor will have to spend about 10 years before they start drawing a real salary, plus undergraduate and medical school costs will approach half a million dollars in that same time.

If you still feel that engineers are not paid enough, try finding a doctor in about 5-10 more years after our universal health care system is in full swing.

I know of a poll at a medical convention that asked doctors if they could do it all over again what field of study would you take… The most popular answer was engineering.

I believe the doctors earned it.

try finding a doctor in about 5-10 more years after our universal health care system is in full swing.

5-10 years with 10 years of schooling.... would be pretty optimistic.

I have a feeling with the move to nationalized healthcare...... they will lower the bar for doctors, or give the nurses more responsibility.

As far as malpractice insurances........Thank our attorneys for that with the lack of tort reform...... but that will change. My guess is nationalize medical care givers,,,,,,, than have it that they can't be sued or make it extremely difficult like a lot of our government agencies.

If anything, with the politicians, no matter what they saythat this policy is well thought out they we are literally flying and making decisions, by the seat of their pants.....its going to be interesting in the next decade or so..........

I know of a poll at a medical convention that asked doctors if they could do it all over again what field of study would you take… The most popular answer was engineering.

I have known doctors who have quit the conventional medical fields to teach or work for the VA hospitals , at a reduced salary, due to malpractice insurance. They may make 100K$ more than an engineer, but we do not have to pay for the insurance.

http://work.chron.com/much-doctors-pay-insurance-7304.html

Exactly. My major was premed (biology) and at the end of my undergraduate work I just went back into engineering.

The course work was easy for me, but I found the future in medicine to be somewhat bleak and that was more than a decade ago. Looking at the way things are now I would have got off that train before it even left the station!

My primary care physician, who I occasionally see more so I can help keep him in business, is pretty discouraged with the turn of events. Really great guy, but dealing with so many people that do very little to take care of themselves is a very frustrating way to have a career.

My girlfriend works in the social services field helping people that need transitional housing and it is the same problem. People just want their problems fixed, but want no stake in doing any work themselves nor do they want to change any behaviors than brought them to the edge of their cliff.

It gets very depressing.

Just make me even more glad to be in engineering!

The trend of having others take care of themselves is in my opinion a trend that is increasing and is a result of a changing environment. It is discouraging in any field to have a feeling that one is just spinning ones wheels in a quagmire.

Liars make an median salary of $114,000 per year and requires an advanced degree beyond undergraduate work.

Oops, did I say Liars? I meant lawyers.

Confused - is there much of a difference?

Amen to all of that! I too have a low opinion of lawyers, especially when they turn into politicians. I've seen judges wag at a cheating lawyer when he should have had to cheater disbarred. Makes it easy to understand why a snake won't bite a lawyer.

"... Makes it easy to understand why a snake won't bite a lawyer..."

I thought it was professional courtesy...

Re 54, 26 and 4 about lawyers.

Consider: An engineer and a lawyer are trapped in a cage with three wild starving lions. The engineer has a gun with 3 bullets. What is the best action to ensure the engineer's survival?

-------------------

Answer: Shoot the lawyer three times!

About a hundred years ago, there were far fewer engineers. The engineeres were the great men who headed their own companies and were assisted by designers and draftsmen, in fact, they did most of the work, the great men provided the concepts and expertise. With the growth of universities, more people obtained degrees and took licenses. These design engineers are the modern equivalents of the designers of 100 years ago, so the average salary has dropped with their inclusion in the count.

The mostly fake cloud of uncertainty with high stakes that lawyers and doctors covered their trades, plus the lack of economies of scale on person to person business is an easy answer. The change only needed time. S.M.

Anyone can call themselves an engineer - and ply for business as such - self-taught or professionally qualified - it doesn't matter.

Doctors aside, accountants, along with lawyers, have stitched industry up with rules and regulations that restricts entry to their professions and enforces their employment.

Accountants and lawyers make sure that they dominate the boards of companies, and they are not going to allow engineers (as a matter of routine) to be elevated to positions over them, or to allow engineers to be paid more.

There are exceptions of course, but those engineers in a position superior to accountants and lawyers are likely to be Managing Directors, CEO's, VP's etc, as as such in that position are much more than just 'engineers'.

Engineers have to get their act together as a collective voice. Don't hold your breath - they haven't done it yet.

I know a lot of people that label themselves engineers whose only certifications is maybe a course in CADD, or even just a bartenders licenses. They and the businesses they work for are so ignorant and do not understand the liability they've created.

I'm sure their insurance agent will be very surprised.

I know quite a few that have practical experience to be engineers. It's the "Self-Labeled" ones. But, as I posted, you can't run a business without insurance, and that can be a requirement from your insurance if you don't have an engineer with a bachelors degree from a ABET college.

Having a degree, or certificate, does not make one an engineer.

Well technically it does, it just doesn't guaranteed to make one a good engineer.

I believe that one can get professional engineering license (PE in Mechanical engineers) you don't need an undergraduates degree, but as long as you complete the requirements, (letter of recommendation from a PE to the board, worked under a PE for a set amount of time).., but an undergraduate degree does make it easier.

I agree.

I've known many degreed engineers who are barely competent or worse and many non-degreed folks who are highly competent (at engineering stuff). That being said, obtaining an engineering degree is probably a reasonable indicator of competence when looking at all engineers across the board.

I am not so sure there is some glass ceiling for engineers.

Most engineers like their job the way it is and not many want to be weighed down by taking on the duties of management or the leadership responsibilities of an executive position.

As far as I know there is nothing holding back people with vision from taking the helm other than ability. but if you have some sort of evidence that engineers are being singled out of some club, I would be happy to see it.

I agree. I am not aware of any ceiling as such. Engineers can aspire to any level they like, but at some point in doing so, they become much more than just engineers.

But just comparing general salary scales, engineers rank below accountants and lawyers. That looks like a deliberate situation, because accountants and lawyers will always rank themselves as superior. And since they have a stranglehold on industry, this will continue to be the case.

As you say, many engineers are happy where they are and would not want to change.

It might seem I am having a dig at accountants and lawyers. In some respects that is true because as a breed they get up my nose. However, as individuals out of context, they are great. I have some vary good friends who are accountants and lawyers....as long as I accept the status quo...I suppose.

Accountants must be fudging some salary numbers as the average is about $50K. ;-)

That's the problem with sweeping statements. In my mind accountants are people who work with money. So accountants include bankers, brokers, fund managers, as well as cashiers and the like.

They may or may not be included in the head count at the particular horizontal level when average salaries are stated by others in this topic, but they all fit somewhere into a collective vertical structure that is self preserving.

Generally the different average pay scales, however calculated are academic and for some reason seems to bother some engineers.

To my mind, engineering is a vocation and a way of life, that presents great opportunities for the future. As mentioned by others, new products must be invented and made for an aging population where demand is bound to increase, and it won't be accountants and lawyers that do it.

And … you will remember, there were no engineers on the B Ark, either!

It is all about being happy and contented on whatever you are doing..

If you are getting self satisfactions coupled with the feeling of self accomplishments with whatever chosen field or career, for me is more important than anything else! A person will always be more productive and therefore be more successful if he/she has reach that stage and achieved that feeling of self accomplishment or fulfillment!

If not? then perspectively the grass will always look greener next door!

Well, yes its true that money does not create happiness, but it sure does make it easier to create happiness. I have come to appreciate the definition of tranquility as stated by Thomas Jefferson, "It is neither wealth nor splendor, but tranquility and occupation which give happiness."

And then for a more appropriate definition, "Tranquility is the quality or state of being free from agitation of mind or spirit; free from disturbance or turmoil."

I think I've been pursing the wrong thing all these years...

NotUrOrdinaryJoe -

And you are also quite correct to say that having money may make a happier life easier to achieve! I too had shared those thoughts before and felt that same way early on when I was in college and during the early stages in my career..

I believe what made the difference was, being able to multiplex engineering application abilities. Developing, honing skills enough that enabled me to take on responsibilities that I never thought of I could do! Learned as well that money (earning potentials), comes together automatically and proportioned with any responsibilities taken!

Jumped into the different related application fields of engineering that ended in the technical applications in medical field! Worn different hats that involved medical researches, working with medical staff, training and credentialing specialty doctors, and as technology is interfaced in medicine..

One thing for sure, based on our ageing demographics, the need for medicine will be stronger in the future. We can also say the same thing about engineering. The demand for medical engineering will only increase and I believe people will pay very well for some of the engineered products. Demand for artificial organs, limbs, skin, and all the add-on assists that will be engineered for the medically compromised individual will become more dominant as we keep ageing. In fact it was estimated that the first person to reach the age of 150 years was born in 2013. So we humans will live longer, work longer, be adaptable to many career changes, and live better. Engineering will be a strong part of medical advancement.

But we can say the same for any science and engineering. The fusion of different disciplines so that we can use a chemical engineered nanotechnology to build a real space elevator, engineer microbes to mine minerals, and on and on. It is a great era for any engineer to be entering. I have seen a lot of changes in my lifetime but we humans have only just begun. I am optimistic for the future and see the innovators as the eventual winners. As if there are winners. Education must improve to assure some sort of leadership and perhaps in the future we will be forced to keep kids in school year round to be competitors. That is what is happening in education in places like China. As for pay in any field, that can be a motivator but really it is the science and the engineering that drives the interest and the innovation. I would suggest reading Micho Kaku's book, The Physics of the Future.

Lawyers, meh. No sense complaining it is a case of what the market will pay. I know a few good ones...and they are still alive.

Unless of course the age of the demographics change , that is more than likely will be the case. And by what I mean to that is people will not be living longer, but reversing.

We humans can do a lot of self inflicted damage to our health, no doubt. But the ability to increase longevity by manipulating health and engineering replacement parts is present today. I am hopeful that we present a new way of life in the next few generations whereby we will forsake the fast food places we know and frequent for healthy choices. My children, all grown adults, are the ones who watch over me like hawks and will force me to eat better. Our abilities keep growing and the next generation gets smarter.

It is science and engineering that will allow us to grow as humans. I am optimistic we will enter a better phase of living. We are growing as humans and I suspect we will keep growing. If we can imagine something and it is within our grasp, the curious human will get there somehow. You should not think we will reverse the demographic based on the recent obesity levels. Imagine a process of gene or DNA manipulation to remove our desire to overeat. Life just gets curiouser and curiouser. And optimism is better than the opposite.

The point that I was making is not that the technology isn't there.

The point that I was trying to make is:

1.) Depending on the insurance, where will the money come from to pay for the operations that require these specialist and pricey procedures. Because, there will be a high demand for specialists. But there is a constant shortage of specialists. With the added load of patiences, this does not happen in a few years, but decades.

2.) will these specialists actually be compensated, or will they feel it's just not worth it.

3.) will coverage be denied due to poor ROI by the insurance company. (This is only speculation and my own)

In other words, what good is technology, if there is no one that's qualified to apply it or service it. Hence shorter life expectancy.

Like I mentioned earlier it will be interesting.

I think that model is changing.

As we move to a more socialized medical system the expensive and experimental treatments will be beyond the reach of most people and insurance (be it a multitude of insurance companies or a single payer system).

That will suppress the advancement of many new medical innovations because there is no way to pay back the large sums of money required for the science and engineering to develop such things.

Sociologically, such life extending innovations do more to burden the overall society than help.

That may sound cruel, but look at the situation in Europe that is developing. The strata of age groups for the population of Europe is heavily weighted to the older retiring generations. The population of young working adults is shrinking.

When this happens the burden of healthcare and retirement expenses fall on the working age groups. As the number of nonworking people grow and the number of working people shrink the system ultimately collapses under its own weight.

Generally, a person's health care costs increase with age and the last year of your life will be the most expensive.

Europe is about 30 years away from this crises and extending the lifespans of nonworking people only exasperates that problem.

While improving the health of people as they age could theoretically delay their retirement age, the job market is simply not large enough to absorb greater numbers of workers. Employment rates run as much as 20% or more in some countries in Europe. This would further inflate the unemployment rate for young job seekers, which are the class of individuals that tend to do the spending that keeps an economy robust.

It is all social-economically more complex than that, but the bottom line is that as the ratio of the aged unemployed increase relative to the young employed, the greater the total social crises becomes.

I am not trying to define the social parameters but was trying to state what the future may look like in terms of longevity. No doubt we will be able to keep people living longer and I will add in healthier. Healthier will mean that older people will stay in the working class longer. I also recognize problems in Europe where most age of retirement is a young 62. In our country, because of changing demographics the age of retirement was raised from 65 to 67. As we progress this retirement value would or should change. So there will not only be a shift in retirement but a shift in those capable of working. I was one of those who were forced retired due to health. Canada does not have a mandated retirement age and people can work as long as they can contribute or an employer wants them. Self employed people can work till they die and that was my bracket. I know I am alive today because of the improvements to health in just the past few decades. I suspect many members of CR4 are here because of the same reason.

As for social medicine, I am not against it at all. I understand the reluctance for change when people are comfortable in the system they know and understand. Doctors in Canada earn as much or more on average than their counterpart in USA. I do think that there is an elite level of doctors who earn much more. Our elite doctors are often recruited into your system. On average, a doctor earning $307,000 (provincial range of $250,000 to 450,000) is satisfied and does not have to vie for clients. Doctors are all private contractors with much of their income paid by the state. They can earn money in other manners and services not covered. But at the same time, doctors do not have to get paid in chickens or hogs. Those who want more or much more than the averages will leave for the greener pastures. However, most are content and can even do research they want to be involved. A social program may make life more difficult for those rich old members of a society that can afford to pay for their longevity. In Canada, these rich people are generally placed in the same queue as the poorest in society. Everyone has equal access. For me social medicine has been a saving grace. I am sure that at my age and condition, insurance would be a difficult commodity. It is not free and there is a price to pay in higher taxes. I will not even try to encourage Americans to abandon a system they know. But without queues, more rich Americans will be able to afford the procedures others cannot. Imagine having the lawyers all live longer.

Oh, I like your answer kevinm! And thanks for the book recommendation! I will look into that.

Recently I attended a brief presentation on the effort to bring the children of our nation up to speed on technology. I see this as a huge challenge. The program is attempting to attract engineers to the public school system. I'm fairly sure that the salary would be substantially less, but having paid for my house and provided already for my retirement, I am tempted to join the ranks. Frequently the teachers have no idea for how to apply what they are teaching. Just crank through the book. No wonder middle and high school was so boring. I would undoubtedly be in for quite a culture shock, going into teaching in public school, but I doubt it could be much worse than working for a boss with no imagination. No shortage of those!

I too have had the unfortunate experience of working with people who were given the title of engineer (maybe in a box of cereal?). One so called engineer asked me how to calculate percentages. After the initial shock of his question had its effect, I realized how enraged I was. It was all I could do to resist the temptation to cuss out the personnel manager (who happened to be a unambitious lawyer).

One of the great problems i have encountered is foreign "engineers" coming to America.

I have worked with many who do not even know the basics in their chosen field. I step in at that moment and make the corrections/decisions. It appears that many foreign engineering schools are nothing more than a paper mill. I am sure this does not apply to all foreign schools.

I have experience where they are very expertise is just areas....... outside of their area it very 'foreign' to them....

Unlike our domestically manufactured engineers ..... where they/we may have a specialty but are more well rounded other areas of engineering.

texasron-

I'm sure you are also aware that the so called "engineers" falls into a wide spectrum.. There are those that were good in academics but poor in applications, did poorly in school but has a good grasp of the engineering principles, (applications wise), mediocre, etc., regardless where they came from or where they graduated!

very good response.

• nepotism:
  Practice of appointing relatives and friends in ones organization to positions for which outsiders might be better qualified

This occurs much too often in foreign owned business in America.

Consider this.

You are going to make someone responsible for a 10 million dollar project.

You have it down to two candidates.

One is someone from outside with a very good resume that ticks all the important requirements.

The other has some gaps in their resume as far as the ideal candidate, but you have known this person all your life and they have always had your back.

Now, which candidate do you feel most trusting with your $10 million?

Or Consider this.

You are going to make someone responsible for a 10 million dollar project.

You have it down to two candidates.

One is someone from outside with a very good resume that ticks all the important requirements.

The other you have known since he/she was born, your even his/her godparent.

He/she may not have the experience for he/she is on 3 years out of high school, but you know he/she will be around 10 years from now.

Now, which candidate do you feel most trusting with your $10 million?

Being around for 10 years says nothing about whether you can trust them with a $10 million project.

My point is that one candidate may have better "qualifications", but it doesn't tell you if you can trust them or even work with them. I have known too many people that come to an interview with a beautiful resume, but bring demons to the workplace.

You really can't expect to get the real story about how some stranger really performs or even their past performance. Calling a previous employer doesn't do much because anything they say can be considered as slander.

Its a risk no matter who it is.......

I have seen thoseof what you speak of also. the point that I was getting at, I have experience business that would trust their 'kin' over professionals, knowing that they will be there 15 years from now.

With things like an investment in training. Why 'waste it' on people who can leave the company, instead train the nephews, the ROI may not be there, but its kept within the family.

Projects, (until the project is 40% over budget due the scope creep that not even their Uncle John want to deal with it, and the only ones that take over this abortion of a project is the people that its their job, while the nephew goes jet skiing)

Qualifications, One is not born with the expertise, and whether your born into a family of experts, they still have to take an interest in the business.

That was the point I was making. Its, not only risk, it's ROI. and its what they feel comfortable with.

I'd give the job to the person I knew and trusted. There's more to managing a project than ticking boxes at the outset.

I applied for a job many years ago. I didn't get it!. Unknown to me, they had a list of boxes to tick, but did not tell me. At the end of the interview they said I did not have all the qualifications they wanted, but admitted than no candidate (yet interviewed) did.

They let me see the list and I could see why. I told them they would have a problem because if I had all the qualifications they asked for I could walk into a job at double the salary scale they were offering. The job went to an existing employee - because they knew him!

I knew him also, and he was quite capable of doing the job. I found out later that he was lined up for the job, but they had to advertise it first.

Each situation is different, and each situation you still have to ask that very same question to every potential employee.

Nepotism has it's benefits.

The CEO of a large family business called the managers together and told them that his son had come of age and would be taking over in due course.

His son would be starting first thing Monday morning. He was to be trained in all aspects of the business from the bottom up. rom sweeping up and tea making, goods-inwards, running errands, stock-control, packing and loading, the office admin, post boy, watering plants, emptying waste bins - everything.

"But no special favours just because he is my son" he said.

As for engineering he was to be trained in all aspects, from technical drawing, research, product design and development. testing and quality control etc, installation, fault-finding, repair and overhaul.

"Then starting Tuesday morning...", he was then to be trained in company law and accountancy ready to join the board on Wednesday.

What happens when they are poor at both but are still employed?

Which was my point, but maybe not noted.

That means they have been promoted to management.

That means they have been promoted to management.
Good one! And so true.

If that is the situation, I just feel sorry for both that person and the company for continuously employing him! That probably is a Federal entity?

There are no limits to promoting the poor performers. The smart people that left for a better salary. Private and public sectors included.