the first one you didnt read...none of those listings below are for this kind of "architect"
We stand to make some money, but its not as lofty as George Castanza made it out to be...plus we have to spend all of our money on starbucks, cool black clothes, cooler thick rimmed black eyeglasses, and good liquor.
As I posted in another thread "why did you become an architect?" we are underpaid compared to other professions like doctors and lawyers who are comparable with our educational requirements and job responsibilities. Coming out of University you are basically expecting 35-45 grand a year depending on location and firm you are working for. That is quite low compared to some law school friends getting 80-150 grand out of school - not to mention those who went into investment banking right out of school before the recent recession.
It's also worth mentioning again that our society is a little backwards regarding professions that get high salaries. Teachers are probably the most important contributors to society yet they are paid like shit. Architects are responsible for the built environment that EVERYONE interacts with EVERY day. Yet we don't even come close to receiving the compensations Lawyers do for what exactly? Piles of paperwork for frivolous law suits? Or Investment Bankers who get billions of bonuses for wasting other people's money? Its a f'd up world we are living in with some completely skewed priorities.
If the salary gives me food and shelter, that's fine with me. Many lawyers and doctors are people obsessed with money and prestige, destined to live their entire lives stuck in an unenlightened box. I know many of these diseased individuals personally, including a relative who once tried to lead me down this same road, before I realized I had no interest beyond the superficial and made the right step in breaking out.
You say that until you are paying for student loans, a mortgage, trying to save for retirement, etc., etc.
Then, to top it off, you spend your days designing really cool things that you will never, ever be able to afford - researching, studying, designing, etc., etc.
It is fine to not care about material goods, that's your choice, but be careful to just dismiss everything, at least until you are out of school and struggling.
I think also it feels like we are broke because it feels like we are working ALL THE TIME. After you work regular hours, then it's overtime, and I know at least for my part I feel personally invested in the work that I do and the projects I work on.
Then typically we don't leave work at work- even if you are not actually doing anything on your projects at home, you're talking about it or thinking about it. Or it's part of our outside life- what to see when we're on vacation, what we talk about or discuss with our friends, etc. Architecture is not an 8-5 job, so you'll never be paid for the true amount of time you're invested in it.
And then there's all the student loans, mortgage, etc. etc. etc.....
Architecture is simply a bad business model. Always has been and always will be. You may make 90 80 or 70 K at some point for a few years(if your really good or lucky) but it will always get interrupted or ended. Owning a firm is rife with its own pitfalls, you can make a small fortune in a good market and equally lose a small fortune in a bad market. I have no idea what the point of this thread is except to say that architecture as practiced today is simply a sort of holdover from the old way of doing things - hire a person to draw up a building then contract it, vs. the newer way - hire a person to draw up a building and permit it then fight with then builder. I have no idea what the future holds. I hope its the old way. My guess and its way off topic but... I think it all goes back to the decline of the dollar.
Well, then, that's another case entirely. If you are fortunate enough to have those things taken care of, then by all means, architecture is a wonderful profession!
Seriously, if you don't have to worry about money, then you can focus on areas you want to explore. Take a look at the celeb architects, almost everyone came from money or was supported (married money), etc.
This also gives you the luxury of pursuing only the work that interests you, entering competitions, etc. Ironically, this can turn out to be a good business model as you build a portfolio of uncompromised work.
Architecture can be an ideal profession if you have money, came from money or have a ton of wealthy colleagues and friends.
Not even sure why you are posting, though, if you already know your answer.
whatever happened to just living within your means?
some (not all) architects are broke (like everyone else in america) because they're brainwashed into thinking they deserve the privileged life like their clients.
taking out another loan to design their own corbu-wannabe shelter, leasing that shiny beamer or porsche they can't afford, not worrying about their student loans, etc...
I never really admired the great architects for their financial wealth, and no architect is remembered based on this.
However, talkitect does have a great point in that we design the built environment and the future lifestyles of society and yet we are paid less compared to other professionals.
My two cents, because that's all I have right now(I need the rest for bills).
Firstly, if you want to make bucket loads of money, then architecture is not for you. It is possible, but not likely since there are so many more "architects" than there are construction projects. Somebody will have to sit at a desk and draw details, and not everybody will be the creative director. Just like paralegals work hard to assist attorneys, nurses to doctors, etc. Architecture is a luxury business. People with money spend it only when they can make more money. They build things with that money, and architects are there to satisfy that need. Remove the need and you've got a pile of black turtlenecks and thick glasses lying around bemoaning the fact that nobody takes them seriously - like now. Others make money? So do you. The economy influences the business of architecture, not the other way around. You practice architecture because you love buildings, the process of building them, are creative, and like to be part of the mystique of "architecture."
Secondly, propagating the idea that architects are responsible for how people live or influence "society", and should be compensated as such is overrated. I don't believe architects should be paid the same as doctors and lawyers, as the education, requirements, or level of responsibility are not the same. Doctors and lawyers are not tied to the economy, have engineers to confirm and take liability for structural integrity, and neither are judged on their aesthetic choices. Architecture is art applied to industry, and those with money, be it the homeowner, the developer, or the board looking to build a museum have the power to create, and shape the future. Architects assist and facilitate the process as well as contributing to the end result. Architects are not here to tell the world how to live, but play a role in a collaboration. A very important one, but by no means the most critical. Bad architecture and design still get built. Design can be very subjective....An experienced restaurateur doesn't need an architect to plan a restaurant; a homeowner doesn't need an architect to tell them where the family room should be, etc, etc. I'm not belittling architecture. It's what I do after all. I'm just a realist.
Lastly, if you want to make money in architecture, learn the politics of a large office, engage in diplomacy, give up your life, and kiss serious ass.
"...Lastly, if you want to make money in architecture, learn the politics of a large office, engage in diplomacy, give up your life, and kiss serious ass."
These days, lots of folks are doing this just to keep their jobs.
Then there are those working for free just to be associated with that effing starchitect. You gotta suck ass big time just to speak in their presence.
"Secondly, propagating the idea that architects are responsible for how people live or influence "society", and should be compensated as such is overrated."
Its overrated because star-architects and instructors at school believe that they can influence society, but realize that they need other fields of practice to back them up. The other majority of architects trying to get by will tell you its a service, and nothing more. The sad reality: Innovative architecture and the means of building comes from other specialized industries, not the other way around. However, the most frustrating imho, is that many architects refuse to innovate new modes of construction, and the few that do [Cough, Frank Ghery] have had a major impact, mostly in academia and university setting.
i should have went into trade school after high school.....welders/electricians make great cash and live life...... architects are always struggling and doing shit design just to pay bills......
the days of the skilled trade or laborer being able to live a middle class lifestyle are fast coming to an end. [take a look around michigan these days...] while the ranks of the architecture profession are contracting, the salaries for those who are able to remain i think will generally be quite good over the course of a career, well above what your average electrician will make over his career. the challenge will be to stay in the profession as design-build contractors eat further and further into our territory. brains over brawn is going to be the key to our professional survival.
architects are a dime a dozen...they all under cut each other... in terms of 'racing to the bottom'.
i have seen both sides on the coin... architects/contractors and in this day and age, i think contractors have it better than architects in terms of work.
sure we should have some sort of knowledge (brains over brawn) but due to globalizing work, alot of the 'brain' jobs are going over seas. manufacturing jobs are also going over seas but we all still need local contractors to build projects.
i sure as hell didnt go to college for 5 years and try to make things happen to only end up broke and barely making it. to each his/her own though. if anyone likes working 60-80 hour weeks for shit pay then so be it.
i can't think of another profession where compensation is disproportionately low compared to the education requirement (5-year minimum), plus internship period (3+ years minimum), plus licensing requirement (2+ years minimum?), while lifestyle expectations are relatively expensive because "good design" becomes both a mantra and a cost-burden in many architects' lifestyles.
Media tends to portray architecture as a cool profession, financially renumerative, and requiring hip clothing, housing, etc choices. Reality is far closer to Target/Walmart than Saks/DWR, particularly if the individual architect 1) doesn't benefit from family monies to subsidize career choice; 2) choses to have family/kids; 3) lives in a high-cost urban area where housing costs are high.
Also recognize that many people who chose architecture as a profession do have other financial resources to subsidize their career choice. Ivy League architecture schools have plenty of students who have never been gainfully employed, whose parents paid full tab for expensive private colleges, who aren't pained by the future financial picture related to their career choice.
Here in Chicago, many middle-aged suburban public school teachers far out earn their counterparts at architectural firms. It's not uncommon to find a middle-school teacher earning $120,000, and having summers off, coupled with the extremely generous pension paid for by taxpayers. I can't think of a single architect here who has a pension waiting for them; we only have our anorexic 401Ks which are further jeopardized by fund freezes and threat of federal seizure (anyone following these two recent developments?). Our "pension" will be the sale of our depreciating suburban house.
It's not uncommon to find a middle-school teacher earning $120,000, and having summers off, coupled with the extremely generous pension paid for by taxpayers.
continuing down this road, however, public school teachers generally do pretty well and often do make more than architects.
thanks for posting the report, j. that looks about accurate, but following up on your comment, the median starting and high salary for a public school teacher in illinois was between $30,000 and $60,000. this is far lower than beginning and high median salaries for architects. (it's the four months off in the summer that our profession is lacking;)
yeah... im not sure architects are any more broke than any other profession...
xaia is right on... we all expect (all Americans) to live this luxurious dream life... truth is, that life is not available for everyone, and though it may send one into a jealous fit to accept, the truth is that just because we are all 'created equal' doesn't mean we all end up equal...
also, i think architects incessant complaining about a lacking sallary has as much to do with an over inflated sense of importance that tends to be a common trait among us. Making 35k hurts cause it means we arent as valuable as we think we are. Egotism is obviously rampant...
These districts have a lot of money. I work at a community college in one and the community college has $65 million in the bank. The $13 million addition I work in was paid for with cash. There was no bond issue. My classroom just got a new $30k Oce printer.
j, teachers are paid salary. the hourly figure quoted in that report does not reflect how teachers are actually compensated. that report was also compiled by a conservative think tank with a fairly obvious ax to grind against the teachers' union. having grown-up in a family of public school teachers and having worked within architecture for several years, i can say from my own experience, architects are compensated far better than public school teachers.
I have an uncle who is a retired gym teacher, was AD at school for 3 years and earns 120K pension. Has been for 10 years now, hes about 64/5 ish. He worked at the school for about 15 years. He will by the time he dies, have earned prob 2x as much in retirement than he did working, as a fucking gym teacher. People look around - the ship is bursting at the seams. You cant keep 2 generations in perpetual debt and earning shit wages forever. Something is going to give - theres too much preasure building up amongst my age group 30-35, and I sense it in the 25-30 year olds as well. Most 35-40 year olds I know are either extremely successful or dirt poor broke, no middle.
Did anyone watch Colbert last night and the clips of the comencement speeches and how all the old people, made distinct effort to say they were not "idealists" but pragmatists now? I almost puked from the pandering.
I think there already is forming a pretty solid generational divide. Now imagine if you get get that generation to not be so split between right and left as theyve been taught to do, but rather whats best for THEIR self interest.
"With all the pensions being raided and/or collapsing, I'm not sure the older folks are doing all that well anymore either"
Public pensioners are very protected, such as teachers, fire, police, servants. Hell a lot of them have pensions that adjust with inflation. When these plans were created and promised 50 years ago - there never was a way to actualy pay for this, and then the benefit train seeped over from public service unions to private sector unions and then eventualy to the non union service / corporate sector. In short its a trend thats comming to an end, fast.
4arch your right about older folks getting slammed in their 401Ks and pensions but you know they had a shot, a 30-40 year amazing economic window. I see people now 35-40 as having been sort of shafted for the last 15 years as they were late to the party, and now are going to pay out the ass for the next 15 years.
J - dont forget theres a big range on when the teacher was hired and what payscale their union negotiated for them in their district and senority level.
compensation equals salary, i.e. annual net income. to try to reframe the argument in terms of hourly pay does not make sense as salaried employees whether teacher or architect rarely work standard hours (we all know that well). it is a way that this particular think tank with a specific agenda uses to massage numbers to come to the conclusion that teachers are compensated better than architects or other white collar workers which is inaccurate.
[oops, i clearly made the mistake of bring up the u-word while evilp is in the house.)
Yes, I suppose it does. Are you looking for sympathy? 'Cause I'm all out of patience with people who run up huge debts - be it outrageous mortgages, out-of-control credit cards, or ill-considered student loans - with little prior thought or concern about how they were going to pay the money back.
Wages in this profession have never been much of a secret - anybody who wanted to know easily could find the information.
also, i think architects incessant complaining about a lacking sallary has as much to do with an over inflated sense of importance that tends to be a common trait among us. Making 35k hurts cause it means we arent as valuable as we think we are. Egotism is obviously rampant..
I think that needs to be repeated. Thanks lletdownl
At the same time. I think those that make others make money should, uh, make money as well.
Lets talk about intellectual property rights here when discussion commercial projects...
the creative folks that i know that are in the profession don't really like it anymore and seeking for another outlet....
the ones that had weak design skills and low creativity are the ones that are licensed and climbing the ladder...
case in point, you don't have to be creative to be an architect..... you just have to play the game. while some get layed off and that same firm gives out bonuses....while you dont get hired due to someone in the office having a grudge against you..... to firms making sure they are 'diversity of employees'.... the list goes on...
if you don't want to play the game and suck it up..then find another field..
if you want to make money in architecture, then get a MBA and just run the business side......
"the creative folks that i know that are in the profession don't really like it anymore and seeking for another outlet....
the ones that had weak design skills and low creativity are the ones that are licensed and climbing the ladder..."
once again, the disconnect between the academy and the profession is brought into sharp relief.
in the end, the market for architectural services - and the work we do - is determined by our clientele. you may express disdain for those you judge to be in the second group above, but clients who are spending their money expect practical results and have little respect for the dilettantes in the former.
i should have went into trade school after high school.....welders/electricians make great cash and live life...... architects are always struggling and doing shit design just to pay bills......
haha, well that's true. People from trade schools don't have too bad career prospects at the moment it seems: http://www-scf.usc.edu/~bittman/trade-schools.html (some professions at least)
But I guess if you love the job you love the job and you forget all the shitty designs you have done once you've get hired for a job that really challenges and satisfies you!!!
- just like many other professions architecture has a pay scale and that is acceptable based on skill and experience and risk in the case of a firm owner.
- what is problematic or troubling is those whole feel that they need to go to a top flight school to succeed and come out of grad school with a 6 figure debt (it just doesn't align with the pay scale, see above)
- the other issue the sense of entitlement that exists through out society or as some else commented living within your means, no one said that being an architect gave you the guarantee that you'd have a house with a white picket fence, the fabulous cottage, a bmw in the driveway, and the range rover for the mall shopping trips.
- I'm not saying its not impossible just be realistic about one's own expectations. This web site is covered in complaints about school debts and the struggles to find reasonable paying jobs. I also read far too often that everyone is under the assumption that one has to come from money or marry it to be successful, that's just plain wrong. Norm Foster is a great example of someone from working class roots and arguably one of the most successful architects ever. ( even if he did come from money or married it ,he is fucking successful by any scale and pretty much sets the bar, money or not he had to earn his success )
- lastly I'll give you a hint that once your school debt is paid for, house is paid for, kids university is paid for, and you have your health its all good and the desire to be content with your place in the world the financial stresses of worrying about "keeping up with the Jones" is gone Architecture is about as much fun as anything from 9 to 5.
whistler - all good points indeed. By my guess most of the complaints about income come from interns and Architects in their 20's & 30's. The problem with this profession is the "reward" of good pay takes a very long time to be realized. I've never worked with a management level Architect that wasn't making a respectable wage, then again they put in their dues of 20+ years to realize that.
I have first hand experience knowing how difficult it is watching fellow classmates enter different professions with higher starting salaries, faster promotion and larger raises/bonuses. While their careers may plateau in middle-management they get to that income level faster and spend more years there than Architects do. Over a lifetime it's a significant earnings difference.
Another problem is the cyclical nature of Architecture. I've worked for a decade now vying for that next bump up the ladder. Instead the economic situation has that dream on hold, further postponing the wait. This also postpones retirement plans of those managers all the way up the ladder as they had to wait equally as long for the higher income job and are playing catch-up with retirement savings plans.
For those reasons amongst others the job of Architecture is a very slow delayed gratification type career when it comes to salary and monetary gain. In an instant gratification society this does not play well. Granted, we might be having as good or better time on-the-job than most but the societal norm is to find happiness through consumerism which is tough in this career.
aquapura... totally agree, I worked in small firms in my 20's / early 30's and realized that I was better suited to that situation, the one short time in a larger office was as close to death as I have ever come. Just hated the corporate structure and the so said management practices of people who had absolutely no knowledge of management or business skills ... they went to architecture school go figure.
I in fact had worked in management situations in jobs prior to Architecture, knew how to network and get jobs, a pretty basic skill set but a key one for someone who is interested in running an office.
The other notable point is that I was temporarily laid off, for about two weeks in the early 90's with a few other employees, the experience changed my career path. That afternoon as I walked home feeling like a looser with school debts, an upcoming marriage with a distinct lack of employment I vowed to never work for anybody else and have them else determine my success or failure. The walk home in the middle of the day when all my friends and everybody I saw on the walk was in the middle of their "work day" I was walking home to nothing, or so it felt. It was only a 15 min walk but it seemed like hours. Very stressful at the time but set my mind on looking out for me rather than looking to be the good corporate soldier, Not that its bad to work for somebody else but I needed to work for myself ... the reward, for me at least, is a combination of financial and emotional satisfaction that comes from doing the work and the recognition that it brings.
Jun 16, 09 3:13 pm ·
·
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.
Architect Financial Situation
I keep hearing that architects are stereotypically broke. The salary, however, doesn't seem that bad:
http://www.indeed.com/salary/Architect.html
http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_compresult_national_DD19000001.html
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Design_Architect/Salary
Is it because it's hard to find commissions? Or is the financial situation of architects an exaggeration? Thanks for the insight in advance.
the first one you didnt read...none of those listings below are for this kind of "architect"
We stand to make some money, but its not as lofty as George Castanza made it out to be...plus we have to spend all of our money on starbucks, cool black clothes, cooler thick rimmed black eyeglasses, and good liquor.
As I posted in another thread "why did you become an architect?" we are underpaid compared to other professions like doctors and lawyers who are comparable with our educational requirements and job responsibilities. Coming out of University you are basically expecting 35-45 grand a year depending on location and firm you are working for. That is quite low compared to some law school friends getting 80-150 grand out of school - not to mention those who went into investment banking right out of school before the recent recession.
It's also worth mentioning again that our society is a little backwards regarding professions that get high salaries. Teachers are probably the most important contributors to society yet they are paid like shit. Architects are responsible for the built environment that EVERYONE interacts with EVERY day. Yet we don't even come close to receiving the compensations Lawyers do for what exactly? Piles of paperwork for frivolous law suits? Or Investment Bankers who get billions of bonuses for wasting other people's money? Its a f'd up world we are living in with some completely skewed priorities.
well in my opinion architects are definately not broke... in comparison to lawyers and doctors ...yes were broke ...i think people do exaggerate a bit
but one thing that does suck financially as an architect is that we are the canaries in the coal mine when it comes to economic downturns
If the salary gives me food and shelter, that's fine with me. Many lawyers and doctors are people obsessed with money and prestige, destined to live their entire lives stuck in an unenlightened box. I know many of these diseased individuals personally, including a relative who once tried to lead me down this same road, before I realized I had no interest beyond the superficial and made the right step in breaking out.
You say that until you are paying for student loans, a mortgage, trying to save for retirement, etc., etc.
Then, to top it off, you spend your days designing really cool things that you will never, ever be able to afford - researching, studying, designing, etc., etc.
It is fine to not care about material goods, that's your choice, but be careful to just dismiss everything, at least until you are out of school and struggling.
I think also it feels like we are broke because it feels like we are working ALL THE TIME. After you work regular hours, then it's overtime, and I know at least for my part I feel personally invested in the work that I do and the projects I work on.
Then typically we don't leave work at work- even if you are not actually doing anything on your projects at home, you're talking about it or thinking about it. Or it's part of our outside life- what to see when we're on vacation, what we talk about or discuss with our friends, etc. Architecture is not an 8-5 job, so you'll never be paid for the true amount of time you're invested in it.
And then there's all the student loans, mortgage, etc. etc. etc.....
trace™, thankfully I already have that all sorted out.
Architecture is simply a bad business model. Always has been and always will be. You may make 90 80 or 70 K at some point for a few years(if your really good or lucky) but it will always get interrupted or ended. Owning a firm is rife with its own pitfalls, you can make a small fortune in a good market and equally lose a small fortune in a bad market. I have no idea what the point of this thread is except to say that architecture as practiced today is simply a sort of holdover from the old way of doing things - hire a person to draw up a building then contract it, vs. the newer way - hire a person to draw up a building and permit it then fight with then builder. I have no idea what the future holds. I hope its the old way. My guess and its way off topic but... I think it all goes back to the decline of the dollar.
Well, then, that's another case entirely. If you are fortunate enough to have those things taken care of, then by all means, architecture is a wonderful profession!
Seriously, if you don't have to worry about money, then you can focus on areas you want to explore. Take a look at the celeb architects, almost everyone came from money or was supported (married money), etc.
This also gives you the luxury of pursuing only the work that interests you, entering competitions, etc. Ironically, this can turn out to be a good business model as you build a portfolio of uncompromised work.
Architecture can be an ideal profession if you have money, came from money or have a ton of wealthy colleagues and friends.
Not even sure why you are posting, though, if you already know your answer.
whatever happened to just living within your means?
some (not all) architects are broke (like everyone else in america) because they're brainwashed into thinking they deserve the privileged life like their clients.
taking out another loan to design their own corbu-wannabe shelter, leasing that shiny beamer or porsche they can't afford, not worrying about their student loans, etc...
i don't understand it. it's kinda funny actually.
I never really admired the great architects for their financial wealth, and no architect is remembered based on this.
However, talkitect does have a great point in that we design the built environment and the future lifestyles of society and yet we are paid less compared to other professionals.
j,
If you have 100k in student loans, no one will give you a house mortgage.
My two cents, because that's all I have right now(I need the rest for bills).
Firstly, if you want to make bucket loads of money, then architecture is not for you. It is possible, but not likely since there are so many more "architects" than there are construction projects. Somebody will have to sit at a desk and draw details, and not everybody will be the creative director. Just like paralegals work hard to assist attorneys, nurses to doctors, etc. Architecture is a luxury business. People with money spend it only when they can make more money. They build things with that money, and architects are there to satisfy that need. Remove the need and you've got a pile of black turtlenecks and thick glasses lying around bemoaning the fact that nobody takes them seriously - like now. Others make money? So do you. The economy influences the business of architecture, not the other way around. You practice architecture because you love buildings, the process of building them, are creative, and like to be part of the mystique of "architecture."
Secondly, propagating the idea that architects are responsible for how people live or influence "society", and should be compensated as such is overrated. I don't believe architects should be paid the same as doctors and lawyers, as the education, requirements, or level of responsibility are not the same. Doctors and lawyers are not tied to the economy, have engineers to confirm and take liability for structural integrity, and neither are judged on their aesthetic choices. Architecture is art applied to industry, and those with money, be it the homeowner, the developer, or the board looking to build a museum have the power to create, and shape the future. Architects assist and facilitate the process as well as contributing to the end result. Architects are not here to tell the world how to live, but play a role in a collaboration. A very important one, but by no means the most critical. Bad architecture and design still get built. Design can be very subjective....An experienced restaurateur doesn't need an architect to plan a restaurant; a homeowner doesn't need an architect to tell them where the family room should be, etc, etc. I'm not belittling architecture. It's what I do after all. I'm just a realist.
Lastly, if you want to make money in architecture, learn the politics of a large office, engage in diplomacy, give up your life, and kiss serious ass.
"...Lastly, if you want to make money in architecture, learn the politics of a large office, engage in diplomacy, give up your life, and kiss serious ass."
These days, lots of folks are doing this just to keep their jobs.
Then there are those working for free just to be associated with that effing starchitect. You gotta suck ass big time just to speak in their presence.
What a whipping.
"Secondly, propagating the idea that architects are responsible for how people live or influence "society", and should be compensated as such is overrated."
Its overrated because star-architects and instructors at school believe that they can influence society, but realize that they need other fields of practice to back them up. The other majority of architects trying to get by will tell you its a service, and nothing more. The sad reality: Innovative architecture and the means of building comes from other specialized industries, not the other way around. However, the most frustrating imho, is that many architects refuse to innovate new modes of construction, and the few that do [Cough, Frank Ghery] have had a major impact, mostly in academia and university setting.
If I knew anyone making this much a few years out of school I would beat them to death and steal their job.
i should have went into trade school after high school.....welders/electricians make great cash and live life...... architects are always struggling and doing shit design just to pay bills......
the days of the skilled trade or laborer being able to live a middle class lifestyle are fast coming to an end. [take a look around michigan these days...] while the ranks of the architecture profession are contracting, the salaries for those who are able to remain i think will generally be quite good over the course of a career, well above what your average electrician will make over his career. the challenge will be to stay in the profession as design-build contractors eat further and further into our territory. brains over brawn is going to be the key to our professional survival.
j-
That's interesting.
What kind of work do you do?
I think there's a path. Right now the stimulus money for the weatherization stuff. It's gonna be huge!
Seek it out. It's gonna get many of us over the hump.
architects are a dime a dozen...they all under cut each other... in terms of 'racing to the bottom'.
i have seen both sides on the coin... architects/contractors and in this day and age, i think contractors have it better than architects in terms of work.
sure we should have some sort of knowledge (brains over brawn) but due to globalizing work, alot of the 'brain' jobs are going over seas. manufacturing jobs are also going over seas but we all still need local contractors to build projects.
i sure as hell didnt go to college for 5 years and try to make things happen to only end up broke and barely making it. to each his/her own though. if anyone likes working 60-80 hour weeks for shit pay then so be it.
i can't think of another profession where compensation is disproportionately low compared to the education requirement (5-year minimum), plus internship period (3+ years minimum), plus licensing requirement (2+ years minimum?), while lifestyle expectations are relatively expensive because "good design" becomes both a mantra and a cost-burden in many architects' lifestyles.
Media tends to portray architecture as a cool profession, financially renumerative, and requiring hip clothing, housing, etc choices. Reality is far closer to Target/Walmart than Saks/DWR, particularly if the individual architect 1) doesn't benefit from family monies to subsidize career choice; 2) choses to have family/kids; 3) lives in a high-cost urban area where housing costs are high.
Also recognize that many people who chose architecture as a profession do have other financial resources to subsidize their career choice. Ivy League architecture schools have plenty of students who have never been gainfully employed, whose parents paid full tab for expensive private colleges, who aren't pained by the future financial picture related to their career choice.
Here in Chicago, many middle-aged suburban public school teachers far out earn their counterparts at architectural firms. It's not uncommon to find a middle-school teacher earning $120,000, and having summers off, coupled with the extremely generous pension paid for by taxpayers. I can't think of a single architect here who has a pension waiting for them; we only have our anorexic 401Ks which are further jeopardized by fund freezes and threat of federal seizure (anyone following these two recent developments?). Our "pension" will be the sale of our depreciating suburban house.
complete and utter bullshit. provide a link.
thanks for posting the report, j. that looks about accurate, but following up on your comment, the median starting and high salary for a public school teacher in illinois was between $30,000 and $60,000. this is far lower than beginning and high median salaries for architects. (it's the four months off in the summer that our profession is lacking;)
yeah... im not sure architects are any more broke than any other profession...
xaia is right on... we all expect (all Americans) to live this luxurious dream life... truth is, that life is not available for everyone, and though it may send one into a jealous fit to accept, the truth is that just because we are all 'created equal' doesn't mean we all end up equal...
also, i think architects incessant complaining about a lacking sallary has as much to do with an over inflated sense of importance that tends to be a common trait among us. Making 35k hurts cause it means we arent as valuable as we think we are. Egotism is obviously rampant...
35k hurts when debt is 100k +
Fidler,
These districts have a lot of money. I work at a community college in one and the community college has $65 million in the bank. The $13 million addition I work in was paid for with cash. There was no bond issue. My classroom just got a new $30k Oce printer.
j, teachers are paid salary. the hourly figure quoted in that report does not reflect how teachers are actually compensated. that report was also compiled by a conservative think tank with a fairly obvious ax to grind against the teachers' union. having grown-up in a family of public school teachers and having worked within architecture for several years, i can say from my own experience, architects are compensated far better than public school teachers.
I have an uncle who is a retired gym teacher, was AD at school for 3 years and earns 120K pension. Has been for 10 years now, hes about 64/5 ish. He worked at the school for about 15 years. He will by the time he dies, have earned prob 2x as much in retirement than he did working, as a fucking gym teacher. People look around - the ship is bursting at the seams. You cant keep 2 generations in perpetual debt and earning shit wages forever. Something is going to give - theres too much preasure building up amongst my age group 30-35, and I sense it in the 25-30 year olds as well. Most 35-40 year olds I know are either extremely successful or dirt poor broke, no middle.
What is going to give?
Our currency most likely / then comes the generational partisanship to compliment our left / right partisanship.
With all the pensions being raided and/or collapsing, I'm not sure the older folks are doing all that well anymore either.
Did anyone watch Colbert last night and the clips of the comencement speeches and how all the old people, made distinct effort to say they were not "idealists" but pragmatists now? I almost puked from the pandering.
I think there already is forming a pretty solid generational divide. Now imagine if you get get that generation to not be so split between right and left as theyve been taught to do, but rather whats best for THEIR self interest.
"With all the pensions being raided and/or collapsing, I'm not sure the older folks are doing all that well anymore either"
Public pensioners are very protected, such as teachers, fire, police, servants. Hell a lot of them have pensions that adjust with inflation. When these plans were created and promised 50 years ago - there never was a way to actualy pay for this, and then the benefit train seeped over from public service unions to private sector unions and then eventualy to the non union service / corporate sector. In short its a trend thats comming to an end, fast.
4arch your right about older folks getting slammed in their 401Ks and pensions but you know they had a shot, a 30-40 year amazing economic window. I see people now 35-40 as having been sort of shafted for the last 15 years as they were late to the party, and now are going to pay out the ass for the next 15 years.
link
J - dont forget theres a big range on when the teacher was hired and what payscale their union negotiated for them in their district and senority level.
compensation equals salary, i.e. annual net income. to try to reframe the argument in terms of hourly pay does not make sense as salaried employees whether teacher or architect rarely work standard hours (we all know that well). it is a way that this particular think tank with a specific agenda uses to massage numbers to come to the conclusion that teachers are compensated better than architects or other white collar workers which is inaccurate.
[oops, i clearly made the mistake of bring up the u-word while evilp is in the house.)
Yes, I suppose it does. Are you looking for sympathy? 'Cause I'm all out of patience with people who run up huge debts - be it outrageous mortgages, out-of-control credit cards, or ill-considered student loans - with little prior thought or concern about how they were going to pay the money back.
Wages in this profession have never been much of a secret - anybody who wanted to know easily could find the information.
I think that needs to be repeated. Thanks lletdownl
At the same time. I think those that make others make money should, uh, make money as well.
Lets talk about intellectual property rights here when discussion commercial projects...
the creative folks that i know that are in the profession don't really like it anymore and seeking for another outlet....
the ones that had weak design skills and low creativity are the ones that are licensed and climbing the ladder...
case in point, you don't have to be creative to be an architect..... you just have to play the game. while some get layed off and that same firm gives out bonuses....while you dont get hired due to someone in the office having a grudge against you..... to firms making sure they are 'diversity of employees'.... the list goes on...
if you don't want to play the game and suck it up..then find another field..
if you want to make money in architecture, then get a MBA and just run the business side......
Philip Johnson once said: "......you need to marry a very rich wife in order to reach high in Architecture.....
or you yourself is from a very rich family.....
godfather of architecture always knew what he was saying :)
the ones that had weak design skills and low creativity are the ones that are licensed and climbing the ladder..."
once again, the disconnect between the academy and the profession is brought into sharp relief.
in the end, the market for architectural services - and the work we do - is determined by our clientele. you may express disdain for those you judge to be in the second group above, but clients who are spending their money expect practical results and have little respect for the dilettantes in the former.
i should have went into trade school after high school.....welders/electricians make great cash and live life...... architects are always struggling and doing shit design just to pay bills......
haha, well that's true. People from trade schools don't have too bad career prospects at the moment it seems: http://www-scf.usc.edu/~bittman/trade-schools.html (some professions at least)
But I guess if you love the job you love the job and you forget all the shitty designs you have done once you've get hired for a job that really challenges and satisfies you!!!
A couple thoughts;
- just like many other professions architecture has a pay scale and that is acceptable based on skill and experience and risk in the case of a firm owner.
- what is problematic or troubling is those whole feel that they need to go to a top flight school to succeed and come out of grad school with a 6 figure debt (it just doesn't align with the pay scale, see above)
- the other issue the sense of entitlement that exists through out society or as some else commented living within your means, no one said that being an architect gave you the guarantee that you'd have a house with a white picket fence, the fabulous cottage, a bmw in the driveway, and the range rover for the mall shopping trips.
- I'm not saying its not impossible just be realistic about one's own expectations. This web site is covered in complaints about school debts and the struggles to find reasonable paying jobs. I also read far too often that everyone is under the assumption that one has to come from money or marry it to be successful, that's just plain wrong. Norm Foster is a great example of someone from working class roots and arguably one of the most successful architects ever. ( even if he did come from money or married it ,he is fucking successful by any scale and pretty much sets the bar, money or not he had to earn his success )
- lastly I'll give you a hint that once your school debt is paid for, house is paid for, kids university is paid for, and you have your health its all good and the desire to be content with your place in the world the financial stresses of worrying about "keeping up with the Jones" is gone Architecture is about as much fun as anything from 9 to 5.
whistler - all good points indeed. By my guess most of the complaints about income come from interns and Architects in their 20's & 30's. The problem with this profession is the "reward" of good pay takes a very long time to be realized. I've never worked with a management level Architect that wasn't making a respectable wage, then again they put in their dues of 20+ years to realize that.
I have first hand experience knowing how difficult it is watching fellow classmates enter different professions with higher starting salaries, faster promotion and larger raises/bonuses. While their careers may plateau in middle-management they get to that income level faster and spend more years there than Architects do. Over a lifetime it's a significant earnings difference.
Another problem is the cyclical nature of Architecture. I've worked for a decade now vying for that next bump up the ladder. Instead the economic situation has that dream on hold, further postponing the wait. This also postpones retirement plans of those managers all the way up the ladder as they had to wait equally as long for the higher income job and are playing catch-up with retirement savings plans.
For those reasons amongst others the job of Architecture is a very slow delayed gratification type career when it comes to salary and monetary gain. In an instant gratification society this does not play well. Granted, we might be having as good or better time on-the-job than most but the societal norm is to find happiness through consumerism which is tough in this career.
aquapura... totally agree, I worked in small firms in my 20's / early 30's and realized that I was better suited to that situation, the one short time in a larger office was as close to death as I have ever come. Just hated the corporate structure and the so said management practices of people who had absolutely no knowledge of management or business skills ... they went to architecture school go figure.
I in fact had worked in management situations in jobs prior to Architecture, knew how to network and get jobs, a pretty basic skill set but a key one for someone who is interested in running an office.
The other notable point is that I was temporarily laid off, for about two weeks in the early 90's with a few other employees, the experience changed my career path. That afternoon as I walked home feeling like a looser with school debts, an upcoming marriage with a distinct lack of employment I vowed to never work for anybody else and have them else determine my success or failure. The walk home in the middle of the day when all my friends and everybody I saw on the walk was in the middle of their "work day" I was walking home to nothing, or so it felt. It was only a 15 min walk but it seemed like hours. Very stressful at the time but set my mind on looking out for me rather than looking to be the good corporate soldier, Not that its bad to work for somebody else but I needed to work for myself ... the reward, for me at least, is a combination of financial and emotional satisfaction that comes from doing the work and the recognition that it brings.
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.