The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: typical wages  (Read 3597 times)

Offline huwston

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
typical wages
« on: 11/01/2007 21:32:13 »
im currently doing A level chemistry and applied science in college, and want to become a chemist, what sort of wages do chemists earn just tarting out?


 

Offline chris

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5339
  • Thanked: 65 times
  • The Naked Scientist
    • View Profile
    • The Naked Scientists
typical wages
« Reply #1 on: 12/01/2007 09:24:10 »
You'd need to do your degree first, which Tony Blair has ensure will now cost you 3000 pounds per year in course fees plus living costs (thus about 8000 pounds per year all in).

Then you'll probably want to consider a PhD, which is the scientific equivalent of a driving license for any serious professional scientist. That will take about 4 years and pay you about 10,000 pounds per year (stipend) whilst you cary out your research.

Then, assuming that's all gone to plan, you'll take on a post-doc position for a few years, starting salary about 20,000 pounds a year. After that you can go into industry, academe or banking!

Chris
 

Offline daveshorts

  • Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2583
  • Physics, Experiments
    • View Profile
    • http://www.chaosscience.org.uk
typical wages
« Reply #2 on: 12/01/2007 09:50:35 »
If you are interested in chemistry you could go a less academic route and directly into industry after your first degree when you would be earning 18-20k to start with, which would then increase depending on how good you were.
 

Offline huwston

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 26
    • View Profile
typical wages
« Reply #3 on: 12/01/2007 21:37:27 »
thanks. i was thinkin about finishing college and staring out as lab tech and try to find an employer that would pay for a degree( if they exist).i would love to get a doctorate or a masters in chemistry.idealy i liked to be a pharmacologist or a chemist, but im just wondering what part of these sciences is the most interesting.

i love explosive chemistry, but i also like the medicinal side of it also.

if anyone who has experience in both of these aspects of chemistry and would be willing to shed some light on my inquiry, i would be most greatful.
 

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
typical wages
« Reply #4 on: 12/01/2007 22:32:40 »
I know that the Chemistry Department at the University of Cambridge was funding lab techs through chemistry degrees at Anglia Polytechnic University (now Anglia Ruskin) five years ago, as I spent 6 months working there in my gap year and was sent all the paperwork.
I have no evidence one way or the other as to whether this was unusual or whether it's likely to still be happening, but I guess it's worth looking into if you live near a university.

My feeling is, certainly with respect to chemistry, that most of it can be "the most interesting bit" depending on your background and who's teaching you. I found theoretical chemistry so mathematical as to be utterly unrewarding (not enough Ah-Now-I-Understand moments per page of algebra) but some people love the fact it really goes to the heart of things. I prefer organic chemistry... you can make a new chemical and you can see it in a little jar and go on and do more stuff with it (sometimes... if the synthesis works... which often it doesn't...).

I know nothing of pharmacology. My impression is of endless tedious lists, but that may just be what the med students describe as pharmacology... which isn't necessarily the same thing!
 

Offline DrN

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 815
    • View Profile
typical wages
« Reply #5 on: 15/01/2007 19:40:28 »
I would say - as a biologist, not a chemist - that it depends on where you see yourself eventually. If its in academia, then you'll probably need the PhD. if its in industry, then many people I know have progressed further and quicker (in terms of salary and responsibility, not necessarily job title, if thats the kind of thing that impresses you!) by stopping after a first degree and working up.

I get the impression that industry people prefer to mould their own scientists rather than take their chances on someone who may have become entrenched in academia already by doing a PhD. PhDs are more independent minded and perhaps less likely to take the direct instruction that is required in industry. also GLP isn't really taught in universities (that I've come across).
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

typical wages
« Reply #5 on: 15/01/2007 19:40:28 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length