Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Salary Survey

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Salary leves in the US are predicated on the law of supply-and-demand which
feeds the desperation factor.  Engineers who aggree to work for peanuts --
many are forced to work for low wages as there are not enough jobs to go
around -- through no fault of their own, are fostering the payment of low
salaries to professionals whose salaries should be commensurate with their
construction-management counterparts.

There is no immediate, short term solution for this problem.  The first step
is to unite and become politically active in fostering legislation written
to increase the demand for our services.  Outlawing the non-licensed
practice of civil engineering in general would be a good start.  Present
laws in California, for instance, are too vague regarding the definition of
engineering.  For instance, one phrase used to define civil engineering in
the civil engineers act is "... the study of the nature of things (para)."
This phrase attempts to virtually classify all science as civil engineering.
With laws written in this fashion, its no wonder that enforcement is

In the real world,  prices are set by how badly people need you.  Consistent
with that notion, our most important possessions in this order are: The
lives and health of our families and ourselves (Medicine Agriculture);
Freedom from oppression and protection from dishonesty (Law);  Accessibility
to sources of energy (Public Utilities)  -- a house in worthless if you die
from exposure within; and Shelter from the elements (Architecture and
Engineering).   Let's face it, were pretty far down on the chain-of-demand.

Tom Bayne
-----Original Message-----
From: Francis.Ang(--nospam--at) <Francis.Ang(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint(--nospam--at) <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Cc: strapac(--nospam--at) <strapac(--nospam--at)>
Date: Friday, May 07, 1999 1:44 AM
Subject: RE: Salary Survey

>Hi! I'm from Makati City, Philippines and we have the same problem here for
>structural engineering. The common notion here is that if you are after for
>money, you go to project management or construction; but if you're after
>honor / prestige / or anything that would make you proud of, go to
>structural engineering.
>Herein the Philippines, a new graduate of civil engineering would receive
>only P4800 if he/she goes into structural. How's that?
>> ----------
>> From: Steve Strapac[SMTP:strapac(--nospam--at)]
>> Reply To: seaint(--nospam--at)
>> Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 9:19 AM
>> To: seaint(--nospam--at)
>> Subject: Salary Survey
>> Some general questions for the group:
>> I was not financially able to practice Structural engineering out of
>> college, the salaries available for the jobs available were 1/2 to 2/3
>> what
>> I make in Construction Management. So I'm not "close" to the field. Of
>> the fields of engineering, Civil seems to pay the least, and within
>> Structural engineering seems to pay the least. This fact hit home when I
>> got a call from a friend of mine from school who went on to get a Masters
>> in Structural Eng. at Stanford, a year after finishing grad school, he
>> quit
>> and went to work for Dean Whitter.. as a stock broker (He hasn't even
>> off his college loan. He explained that he looked at his mentors, and
>> they had accomplished, and he realized that in current dollars, he could
>> expect to max out at $70k/year when he retired, in Los Angeles. With all
>> the license requirements, etc., why don't structural engineers earn
>> significantly more?
>> Why do they bill "per job" vs. attorneys (accountants too?) who bill per
>> hour? It seems as if you are all in a race to bid yourselves out of
>> existence!?
>> Is there an organized effort to rectify this?
>> Steve Strapac, P.E.