Scientists and Engineers

Reflecting the importance of advanced technologies to an expanding global economy, employment in science and engineering dramatically increased during the second half of the last century. Most recently, however, defense spending has contracted considerably, and technological changes, while a boon to productivity, have not only made non-technical jobs redundant but are also beginning to negatively affect the demand for scientists and engineers. In addition, new technology is revolutionizing the ways in which such professionals are employed and their work managed.

Employment in Science and Engineering

While more than 25 engineering specialties are identified by professional societies, the Department of Labor collects detailed data for only eleven: aerospace, materials, mining, petroleum, chemical, nuclear, civil, electrical and electronic, computer, industrial and mechanical. Of these, electrical, electronic and mechanical engineers comprised the largest occupational groups in 1998.

A large proportion of engineers (78%) is employed by private, for-profit firms. Far fewer (14%) are employed by state, local or federal governments, and a smaller number are either self-employed or working in non-profit agencies and educational institutions. Construction is the biggest industry employer of engineers, spending more than $37.9 billion on engineering services in 1993 (Goodman, 1996).

The majority (58%) of scientists also are employed in private, for-profit firms, although, unlike engineers, they are not found in great numbers in construction. Many work in professional services, trade and finance, and other services including education; indeed, 24% work in educational institutions (Goodman, 1996).

Employment projections for scientists and engineers differ significantly by specialty. Employment for computer engineers, database administrators and computer support specialists is expected to add an average of 150,000 jobs each year between 1998 and 2008. Most other engineering and scientific occupations will grow at a slower pace during the ten-year period.

The gender gap is alive and vast in most engineering and science occupations. In 1999, for example, there were 1,860,000 male engineers, but only 221,000 female engineers. The same sizeable difference exists in the science and computer fields.

Earnings and Working Conditions of Scientists and Engineers

In 1998, most engineering occupations boasted median annual wages of $55,000 or more. Petroleum engineers earned the highest median annual wages, followed closely by nuclear engineers. Interestingly, both occupations are stagnant or in decline regarding employment numbers. While private industry typically offers higher salaries to engineers than do state or local governments, there are demonstrable pay gradations within the private sector. Transportation and utilities, for example, pay the highest salaries to engineers, while the Service industry pays the lowest (Hoffmann, 1997). The level of work performed, of course, has a significant influence on engineers’ wages. One study demonstrates that engineers in entry-level positions earned less than a third as much as their counterparts in high-level engineering positions (Ibid.).

Among scientists, physicists and astronomers earned the highest median annual wage ($73,236) and mathematicians the lowest ($36,566). Like engineers, scientists find that private sector industries offer higher wages than do state and local governments (Steinmeyer and Hoffmann, 1998).

The 1991 and 1999 disparities in pay between men and women in the engineering and science professions are significant. The disparity is the greatest among computer operations and systems researchers, analysts, and scientists and has grown during a period when industry claimed there was a shortage of such personnel in order to justify the importation of guest workers from abroad. Women's wages as a percentage of men's declined for computer systems analysts and scientists from 89.1% in 1991 to 84% in 1999!

While the median annual salaries of Asian scientists and engineers did not vary significantly from their white counterparts, the salaries of other groups were generally five to ten percent lower than both.

Unionization and Changes in the Field

Insecurity stemming from seismic changes in technology, corporate structures, converging industries and global competition mark nearly every discipline in science and engineering. As mentioned, engineering and scientific occupations have grown rapidly in the past 50 years (Goodman, 1996), but the rate of growth has slowed since 1990. Although this does not mean a decrease in employment, it does mean that these occupations are growing at a pace that is more consistent with the average for all the professions (Goodman, 1996).

Why has this happened? First, the technological explosion that at first demanded rapid employment growth among engineers and scientists, now, ironically, is beginning to turn on its creators. For example, advances in computer software in engineering — primarily in the form of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing — tends to displace many skilled engineers. By using such a program, "one skilled senior professional can accomplish the same amount of work that used to require teams of six to twelve degreed professionals" (Goodman, 1996).

The creation of "smarter" software, advances in telecommunications and the speed of data processing enable engineers and computer scientists to solve computing problems far more efficiently, and even do it thousands of miles from the site at which the final result will be utilized. This empowers employers to leave the U.S. in search of lower paid professionals abroad and to employ fewer professionals and technicians than would have been required if these advances had not taken place.

In addition to the insecurities created by changing technology, scientists and engineers face the consequences of steady reductions in U.S. defense spending and space research. For example, Goodman (1996) estimates that as the defense industry cut employment during the mid-1980s and early 1990s, its purchases of computer-related services decelerated to one-tenth the previous rate.

Unions in the Technical Professions

Although many unions count science and engineering professionals among their members, there have been few large-scale organizing campaigns and union density in these large professions is less than that in many other professional fields, such as teaching, nursing, performing arts, etc. However, as the 20th century drew to a close there were indications that this situation was changing. In 1996, for example, University of California researchers and scientists concerned about maintaining professional standards voted overwhelmingly for representation by the University Professional and Technical Employees (UPTE), an affiliate of the Communications Workers of America (CWA). The unit covers technical researchers at all nine university campuses, five medical centers and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. In addition to concern for maintaining professional standards, researchers cited the desire for better compensation and benefits, career training and development, and a need for greater respect as primary reasons for joining CWA/UPTE.

The UC campaign was large in terms of the size of the unit involved in the election. But, three years later, a campaign by a unit of more than 23,000 Boeing engineers and technicians to affiliate with an AFL-CIO union (the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers) drew even more attention. A successful strike by these engineers in early 2000 against one of the nation's largest corporations was taken by many observers as a sign that technical professionals— especially engineers —were indeed growing anxious about their status and security, and were looking to union representation for a remedy.

Sources Cited

Braddock, Douglas. "Occupational Outlook Projections," Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 122, No. 11, November 1999, pp. 51-77.

Goodman, William C. "The software and engineering industries: threatened by technological change?" Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 119, No. 8, August 1996, pp. 37-45.

Hoffmann, Kenneth J. "Analyzing Wage Patterns of Engineers and Secretaries," Compensation and Working Conditions, Fall 1997, pp. 19-24.

National Science Board. 1998. Science and Engineering Indicators—1998. Arlington, VA, National Science Foundation (NSB 98-1).

Steinmeyer, John K. and Kenneth J. Hoffmann. 1998. "BRIEF: Scientists’ Earnings."Compensation and Working Conditions Online, Vol. 3, No. 1.

Trankina, Michele L. 1992. "How Many Researchers Are Really Happy in Their Work?" The Scientist, Vol. 6, No. 4.

U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. 1998. Occupational Outlook Handbook 1998-99 Edition, Bulletin 2500, Washington, DC, Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office.