i agree, arch practices in larger markets like ny and la etc tend to pay less, it seems.
my cost of living in nyc is about 2x what it was in florida...
and of course my salary isn't double what it was...
so i do not put as much money into savings each month.
that said, i make enough to enjoy a nice lifestyle that includes living in a studio in gramercy, eating and partying at will, paying my undergrad loans and still putting a small amount away each month.
i work for a small design firm, not a large corporate firm.
...pretty sure the Reagan administration set up "trickle down" a few years before Bush 1...
n_ that range is about right for my pre-pro degree holding friends and acquaintances that are currently working in nyc...a few make more and a few make less, but the majority are within that range...and the types of firms range from very small to very large...
And my friends in Portland always comment how cheap I've got it in Mpls. It's widely known that wages are never porportional to cost of living. Your best bet wage wise is probably some farm town where you can live large on $35k. Who said barn dances can't be fun?
I think the trickle down works this way...big rich clients make even more $...take that extra $ and decide to build a new estate/vacation home...hire architect to design said building...intern has work.
Definition is a bit cynical, but more or less how it's supposed to work.
And whoever has over 5 years exp and isn't making $40k is either A.) a complete slacker or B.) a sap for still working at that wage. We hire interns right outta college for $38k and sure ain't in LA cost of living range.
I don't know anybody at laika. I often think of applying there myself. Then I remember I don't really want a job.
You know 3DS max (actually the alias packages are probably more useful)? You can probably get a job there. Or you could freelance for me... seriously... I need help :)
here's the deal - dont expect to make more than 40k at a two-person mostly remodel-type-architecture firm. If you want more dough, you HAVE to go into a min. 15-20 person firm that is NOT boutique.
That said, there are plenty of those in town. you have to look and get your priorities straight.
You should read Joel Kotkin's article on democracyjournal.org "Urban Legend." Among other topics it discusses upward mobility in so called 'boutique cities.'
Aside from that:
Los Angeles is based on rising land value - buildings are an afterthought. Look around the city: the bulk of buildings that have been built in the past 40 years aren't very inspiring. I am at loss when trying to explain to my guests why this city is so ugly.
The predominant architectural paradigm is the cheap: Architecture and building quality are not valued. The code maximum is built in the most economical way. Architects are paid accordingly.
I know a few people with similar experience who finished school in the last few years, and I would say their salaries have ranged in the 45-48 range. But that if for work on larger more corporate or institutional projects (not residential).
It's also much higher than what my friends and I were making just out of school (grad school) 7 years ago (I started at 28K I think). Salaries in LA have actually gone up a lot in the last 5 years or so, concurrent with cost of living increases. And although the starting pay is not that great, you will jump up in salary quite a bit after 5 years or so, and can make a decent living if you're willing to go to a larger firm.
In general though, smaller and design oriented offices don't pay very well, and certainly not well enough for you to be able to buy a house or pay bills as a single person with the current real estate market here (insert everyone talking about moving to Portland, including me).
i've always been much more inspired by the architecture in LA than NYC.
In NYC, it seems like because it is so dense, the only projects that get built are huge developer projects with boring architecture, and good young architects get relegated to designing interiors.
in LA, however, because the city (though dense) lacks the density of NYC and thus lacks the need for large-scale projects. Thus, the equivalent of a young new york architect doing a restaurant interior would be a young LA architect designing a cool house up in the hills or a freestanding restaurant on wilshire. Basically, LA seems like a really great testing ground for radical, new, exciting architecture in a way that new york can't be because of the scale of their projects. There's a lot of ugly sprawl in LA, but there are also so many really great gems.
allim70, a former roommate in LA graduated with his B.Arch from Academy of Arts in SF and started off at 45k/year in a 30-person firm up in the East Bay, Muraga area.
I'm starting to believe that those who start off with a low salary are those who 1) don't know/understand their worth, in other words - ignorance and 2) are willing to work for their "starchitect" at any rate.
I think it is a combination of supply & demand, coupled with the actual financial situations of various firms. Having worked at small to mid-size firms on boutique as well as cookie cutter institutional stuff, and having run a design-build firm for 4 years (which we are closing due to insufficient income), I have seen huge variations in firms profits and how they are managed. The smaller design-oriented firms suffer partially because they spend a lot more time on design and do all custom work, but also usually because the principals don't have the time to put in to make things run more smoothly and increase the profits. They also usually don't have the business acumen - the larger firms hire development people or bring in partners specifically to maximize profitability.
In terms of my personal experience negotiating salary, it has run the gamut - at times I have been offered much less than I asked for and told by more than one firm they couldn't afford to pay me more, other times I have asked for a high number and they've offered me more. A lot depends on the situation of that particular firm. I don't have the knowledge to speculate as to why salaries seem to vary a lot more than in other professions, except to think maybe that the range of possible services offered by architects varies so widely that a lot of jobs really can't be compared to one another - though people with the same level of experience and education may be looking at them, the tasks that they will be performing and the ultimate product is so different they can almost be considered a different field (at the extremes think urban masterplanning or tract development vs. high-end residential kitchen design or furniture fabrication).
Recently relocated to LA from Nebraska fresh out of grad school. Mid-high 40s is not at all out of the question for established LA offices. Even starchitect ones. However, if you want to work for a smaller boutique design office that hopes to be the next "big thing"... that is another world when it comes to $. (ie, you won't get any)
My advice is to never sell yourself short on how much your labor is worth... architects make a bad habit of this and it hurts the whole lot of us.
as - "I don't think anybody knows what architects are supposed to make."
what a weird question!
wages - in all industries - are set by three factors: a) the overall economics of the industry, b) the productivity of individual workers, and c) the supply of and demand for qualified labor.
hate to break it to you, but in big metro areas like LA and NYC, all three of those factors are working against entry-level architects.
mleitner - I just read Joel Kotkin's "Urban Legend" article. Fantastic read.
Since we as architects are naturally in a creative profession is that why we seem to be attracted to these "botique" cities? All the time on archinect we have discussions about NYC, LA, SF, Seattle, Portland, Boston...but not near as much discussion about Orlando, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, or Phoenix. And the least discussion is about the wannabe "botique" cities like St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Cincinatti, etc.
The article several times mentioned Houston as an example of a modern wealth creating city. Having lived there and staying in contact with people there I tend to agree. Recently a CPA friend of mine working in Houston was offered a job in LA. He turned it down as they were offering 20% less salary than he currently was making in Houston. They were blown away that Houston pays that well. Given what this tread is saying about intern salaries in LA, I'd venture a guess it's similar for architects too.
Actually, for the record, the 2005 AIA Compensation Survey provides the following base pay information for the Los Angeles Metro Area for entry-level interns:
Survey Mean: $37,500
Survey Median: $39,000
Since the AIA survey was based on year-end 2004 data, if you escalate those figures by the change in the CPI since late 2004, the comparable 2007 figures would be:
Mean: $41,000:
Median: $42,600
For 3rd-Year Interns, the survey numbers are:
Survey Mean: $40,400
Survey Median: $43,300
Inflated by CPI, comparable 2007 numbers would be:
Mean: $44,200
Median: $47,300
Not sure why so many here feel the LA area's wages are unusually low ... the data suggests otherwise. These rates are generally consistent with, if not a little higher than, other major metro areas.
Los Angeles Inter Salary???
i agree, arch practices in larger markets like ny and la etc tend to pay less, it seems.
my cost of living in nyc is about 2x what it was in florida...
and of course my salary isn't double what it was...
so i do not put as much money into savings each month.
that said, i make enough to enjoy a nice lifestyle that includes living in a studio in gramercy, eating and partying at will, paying my undergrad loans and still putting a small amount away each month.
i work for a small design firm, not a large corporate firm.
...pretty sure the Reagan administration set up "trickle down" a few years before Bush 1...
n_ that range is about right for my pre-pro degree holding friends and acquaintances that are currently working in nyc...a few make more and a few make less, but the majority are within that range...and the types of firms range from very small to very large...
i also am surprised LA isn't somewhat comparable.
And my friends in Portland always comment how cheap I've got it in Mpls. It's widely known that wages are never porportional to cost of living. Your best bet wage wise is probably some farm town where you can live large on $35k. Who said barn dances can't be fun?
I think the trickle down works this way...big rich clients make even more $...take that extra $ and decide to build a new estate/vacation home...hire architect to design said building...intern has work.
Definition is a bit cynical, but more or less how it's supposed to work.
And whoever has over 5 years exp and isn't making $40k is either A.) a complete slacker or B.) a sap for still working at that wage. We hire interns right outta college for $38k and sure ain't in LA cost of living range.
people (clients) in LA are VERY CHEAP and will fuck you over. Those in the entertainment industry especially
I wasn't going to go quite that far, but I think that's kind of it. There's a different mentality in LA. People are cheap (employers included).
psycho-mullet
do you like Portland?
Yes I do. I was just on vacation in LA. And it's good to be back in Portland :) By february I may be suicidal from the rain, but its sunny right now.
I grew up in the NW though.
can you get me a job here...
http://www.laika.com/
I don't know anybody at laika. I often think of applying there myself. Then I remember I don't really want a job.
You know 3DS max (actually the alias packages are probably more useful)? You can probably get a job there. Or you could freelance for me... seriously... I need help :)
here's the deal - dont expect to make more than 40k at a two-person mostly remodel-type-architecture firm. If you want more dough, you HAVE to go into a min. 15-20 person firm that is NOT boutique.
That said, there are plenty of those in town. you have to look and get your priorities straight.
i actually know some people at Laika; i know a lot of people in the stop-motion world in LA and it is a small industry
You should read Joel Kotkin's article on democracyjournal.org "Urban Legend." Among other topics it discusses upward mobility in so called 'boutique cities.'
Aside from that:
Los Angeles is based on rising land value - buildings are an afterthought. Look around the city: the bulk of buildings that have been built in the past 40 years aren't very inspiring. I am at loss when trying to explain to my guests why this city is so ugly.
The predominant architectural paradigm is the cheap: Architecture and building quality are not valued. The code maximum is built in the most economical way. Architects are paid accordingly.
I know a few people with similar experience who finished school in the last few years, and I would say their salaries have ranged in the 45-48 range. But that if for work on larger more corporate or institutional projects (not residential).
It's also much higher than what my friends and I were making just out of school (grad school) 7 years ago (I started at 28K I think). Salaries in LA have actually gone up a lot in the last 5 years or so, concurrent with cost of living increases. And although the starting pay is not that great, you will jump up in salary quite a bit after 5 years or so, and can make a decent living if you're willing to go to a larger firm.
In general though, smaller and design oriented offices don't pay very well, and certainly not well enough for you to be able to buy a house or pay bills as a single person with the current real estate market here (insert everyone talking about moving to Portland, including me).
Is this high salary(45-48K) happening in only LA? if so, why in LA???just curious.......
dear mleitner,
i've always been much more inspired by the architecture in LA than NYC.
In NYC, it seems like because it is so dense, the only projects that get built are huge developer projects with boring architecture, and good young architects get relegated to designing interiors.
in LA, however, because the city (though dense) lacks the density of NYC and thus lacks the need for large-scale projects. Thus, the equivalent of a young new york architect doing a restaurant interior would be a young LA architect designing a cool house up in the hills or a freestanding restaurant on wilshire. Basically, LA seems like a really great testing ground for radical, new, exciting architecture in a way that new york can't be because of the scale of their projects. There's a lot of ugly sprawl in LA, but there are also so many really great gems.
allim70, a former roommate in LA graduated with his B.Arch from Academy of Arts in SF and started off at 45k/year in a 30-person firm up in the East Bay, Muraga area.
I'm starting to believe that those who start off with a low salary are those who 1) don't know/understand their worth, in other words - ignorance and 2) are willing to work for their "starchitect" at any rate.
I think it is a combination of supply & demand, coupled with the actual financial situations of various firms. Having worked at small to mid-size firms on boutique as well as cookie cutter institutional stuff, and having run a design-build firm for 4 years (which we are closing due to insufficient income), I have seen huge variations in firms profits and how they are managed. The smaller design-oriented firms suffer partially because they spend a lot more time on design and do all custom work, but also usually because the principals don't have the time to put in to make things run more smoothly and increase the profits. They also usually don't have the business acumen - the larger firms hire development people or bring in partners specifically to maximize profitability.
In terms of my personal experience negotiating salary, it has run the gamut - at times I have been offered much less than I asked for and told by more than one firm they couldn't afford to pay me more, other times I have asked for a high number and they've offered me more. A lot depends on the situation of that particular firm. I don't have the knowledge to speculate as to why salaries seem to vary a lot more than in other professions, except to think maybe that the range of possible services offered by architects varies so widely that a lot of jobs really can't be compared to one another - though people with the same level of experience and education may be looking at them, the tasks that they will be performing and the ultimate product is so different they can almost be considered a different field (at the extremes think urban masterplanning or tract development vs. high-end residential kitchen design or furniture fabrication).
Recently relocated to LA from Nebraska fresh out of grad school. Mid-high 40s is not at all out of the question for established LA offices. Even starchitect ones. However, if you want to work for a smaller boutique design office that hopes to be the next "big thing"... that is another world when it comes to $. (ie, you won't get any)
My advice is to never sell yourself short on how much your labor is worth... architects make a bad habit of this and it hurts the whole lot of us.
as - "I don't think anybody knows what architects are supposed to make."
what a weird question!
wages - in all industries - are set by three factors: a) the overall economics of the industry, b) the productivity of individual workers, and c) the supply of and demand for qualified labor.
hate to break it to you, but in big metro areas like LA and NYC, all three of those factors are working against entry-level architects.
mleitner - I just read Joel Kotkin's "Urban Legend" article. Fantastic read.
Since we as architects are naturally in a creative profession is that why we seem to be attracted to these "botique" cities? All the time on archinect we have discussions about NYC, LA, SF, Seattle, Portland, Boston...but not near as much discussion about Orlando, Atlanta, Houston, Dallas, or Phoenix. And the least discussion is about the wannabe "botique" cities like St. Louis, Cleveland, Detroit, Cincinatti, etc.
The article several times mentioned Houston as an example of a modern wealth creating city. Having lived there and staying in contact with people there I tend to agree. Recently a CPA friend of mine working in Houston was offered a job in LA. He turned it down as they were offering 20% less salary than he currently was making in Houston. They were blown away that Houston pays that well. Given what this tread is saying about intern salaries in LA, I'd venture a guess it's similar for architects too.
Actually, for the record, the 2005 AIA Compensation Survey provides the following base pay information for the Los Angeles Metro Area for entry-level interns:
Survey Mean: $37,500
Survey Median: $39,000
Since the AIA survey was based on year-end 2004 data, if you escalate those figures by the change in the CPI since late 2004, the comparable 2007 figures would be:
Mean: $41,000:
Median: $42,600
For 3rd-Year Interns, the survey numbers are:
Survey Mean: $40,400
Survey Median: $43,300
Inflated by CPI, comparable 2007 numbers would be:
Mean: $44,200
Median: $47,300
Not sure why so many here feel the LA area's wages are unusually low ... the data suggests otherwise. These rates are generally consistent with, if not a little higher than, other major metro areas.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.