The latest AIA Compensation Survey (2005) would include you in this category:

Architect/designer II: Licensed architect or nonregistered graduate with 6–8 years of experience; responsible for daily design or technical development of project.

For the City of New York, the AIA survey for Architect/Designer II shows median compensation to be $52,900 and mean compensation to be $55,400.

For the New York City Metro Area, the AIA survey for Architect/Designer II shows median compensation to be $52,900 and mean compensation to be $55,300.

These numbers are base pay only and do not include any bonuses, overtime pay, or benefits.

Quizzical, does that AIA Survey list a low/high number? If so could you list it (for that particular group)? Thanks.

sure:

City of New York: $51,800 - $58,000
NYC Metro Area: $51,800 - $58,000

These are the full range, from the lowest quartile to the upper quartile.

The lower quartile marks where 25% of the reported values are lower than the figure given and 75% are higher. The upper quartile marks where 75% of the reported values are lower than the figure given and 25% are higher.

depressing...

sometimes i wish that i loved looking at legal documents as much as i love looking at architecture...

time to go read the fountainhead again.

The Chicago salary numbers seem to be pretty similar, but the cost of living is definitely lower here (particularly housing).

That's Chicago,

Am I to understand that you have the Chicago figure for said 2005 AIA survey?

Would you kindly drop some numbers or anything else interesting about the Chicago market?

Thanks

Where does the AIA get their information? Jobs.com or monster.com or some website like that gives much higher numbers. I would tend to think the AIA would be much more reliable than a site like that, but this website's survey seems to lean towards the higher numbers and not the AIA numbers. For that market atleast. I think.

i served on the aia committee that designed the last survey ... the way the aia structures its survey and categorizes various positions differs, in some significant and important ways, from the way jobs.com, salary.com and monster.com presents their data. (note: if you look closely at those three sites, you'll discover that all three appear to use the same underlying data engine and the same set of position descriptions)

for example, salary.com stops with Architect V -- that's anybody who's licensed with 4+ years of experience. that means a 5-year architect is included in the same data pool with architects who've been working 30 years ... that will skew the numbers and make them unreliable at all levels (i.e. their approach understates compensation for the more experienced and overstates compensation for those with fewer years)

the aia survey looks at 13-different architectural categories, from student, through 3-different levels of interns, up to project manager and principal level positions. using a very well designed survey form with clear descriptions of what each position covers, the data is solicited from actual design firms ... in my experience, firms that participate take a lot of care when submitting data ... i know that i spent about 3-4 hours myself compiling and verifying data for our mid-sized firm

in the 2005 survey, nearly 900 design firms across the country participated and most of the more common architectural positions received responses tied to between 800 - 2,800 actual jobs ... the data is presented nationally, regionally and, when there's enough data to constitute a meaningful sample, by state and major city

in my own practice, i find the aia data to be consistent with actual wages paid in our locality .... i recruit a lot in other cities and i also find the data in the aia survey to be consistent with the compensation levels candidates in those cities discuss with me.

i find the other sources of architectural salary data to significantly overstate what I actually see in practice ... who knows where jobs.com, salary.com and monster.com get their data

I think some of those overstated salary numbers roll in the value of benefits. Sure the salary of that kid right out of grad school is $38k but they are getting $10k in benefits from health insurance, life insurance, PTO, 401k, etc. From my experience the AIA numbers are close, when I have seen them. My gripe is that the AIA charges far too much for it, which is fine for firms recruiting, but not good for someone right out of school trying to ask for a fair wage. The latest and most current slaray data should be free for experience levels of 0-5 years. Then again, I don't think the AIA is all that serious about helping out the young in this profession, present company included.

Syracuse University does a great annual survey that is freely available. I just wish it was done across several Universities and not so heavily leaning towards the NE markets. I am skeptical about the high ends of their salary survey. They do consistently have $1m+ salaries posted and fresh grads making $75k+. Granted it does filter out the non-arch careers, but I think people there tend to inflate or deflate their wage.

: i understand your frustration about the cost of the survey ... it would be nice if it could be made a lot less expensive, but it takes a lot of effort, requires a lot of expensive staff time, and involves considerable resources to conduct a good reliable survey ...

we live in a world where lots of data seems freely available ... yet, good, reliable data that actually has meaning typically costs somebody something ... even so, the aia report is only $50 for aia members, but it is $225 for non-members ... if you know somebody who is a member, they'd probably be happy to assist you in purchasing the PDF download: 2005 Compensation Report - click on "Compensation Report" in the left margin ...

i believe you are wrong about the aia's attitude regarding recent graduates ... not providing them free access to data is not the same as turning our back on them ... to some extent, that's like saying the aia doesn't care about recent graduates because they won't pay off their student loans ... you have to remember, the aia is a member driven organization ... it is run for - and supported by - it's dues paying members, who tend to be licensed architects. those members expect the aia to run itself in a viable manner - activities that cost money to produce also require fees from those who want the information provided ...

back to the survey: one of the reasons i lurk around archinect is to answer specific questions about wages that come up from time to time ... if the poster doesn't want an excruciating level of detail, i'm happy to look up a little data and post it here. i also understand that many local components have copies of the survey and are willing to let members of their community drop by for a quick look. schools of architecture should also have copies available in their libraries.

compensation surveys can be useful guidance, but they're not gospel - either for the candidate or the firm. at the end of the day, the firm has to make a decision about what it feels the candidate's services are worth and the candidate has to make a decision about what (s)he is willing to sell those services for. it's still a "free market" thing that becomes the subject of negotiation and persuasion - for both parties there is no absolute answer but range of answers that must take into consideration a wide variety of factors such as opportunity, potential, talent, working conditions, benefits, project opportunities, etc.

too often on this forum i see efforts to bring "magic wand" thinking to this topic - sure, do your research - but your best bet is to have meaningful conversation with your potential employer and listen as much as you speak - don't just assume the firm at which you're interviewing is trying to take advantage of you