On average what is the starting salary?

neg-nao, on Jul 25 2007, 10:41 AM, said:

5.85 an hour i believe

Ji, on Jul 25 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

please...i make 7.40 as a cashier at Harris teeter. I believe around 35-40 thousand a year on avg.

Well if a met came out of college and got a job in the Federal Govt it would be Grade 7 (about $38,000) or with a masters degree maybe Grade 9 (about $46,000).

I would guess it depends on what branch your in (TV met, if you work for the governemt, or a private industry)

Depends completely on where you start... private company (like AccuWx), government, TV, energy... All have different salary ranges.

Level of education plays a role as well.

Coastal BECS, on Jul 25 2007, 10:44 AM, said:

harris teeter pays well!

Ji, on Jul 25 2007, 10:47 AM, said:

lol. i know. its not too bad. and besides I only work weekends!

Coastal BECS, on Jul 25 2007, 09:44 AM, said:

All the first year folks at Accuweather break out in uncontrolable laughter....

sarwx, on Jul 25 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

Don't I know it!

Glad I have passed that phase of my career.

Ji, on Jul 25 2007, 10:42 AM, said:

You should know all about minimum wage. During your frequent layoffs, how much did you collect
in unemployment?

VAwxman, on Jul 25 2007, 08:52 AM, said:

Me too. On average starting out, a meteorologist will be unjustly paid only around 20,000 to 30,000/per year. Somewhere in the ball park around 25,000 with just a BS. You're best bet is to try to get into government work. If you have good features (face, voice, etc) I would go for TV/radio, but you'll start making peanuts at first, but if you catch someone's eye you can go far. Finally, as a last resort there are the private weather companies, which is akin to slave labor. However, you do gain a lot of experience so you can advance to other parts of your career. Sadly, I've seen many great meteorologist leave the business because it can be very hard to make a living on our passion.

AllWeather, on Jul 25 2007, 10:55 AM, said:

about 5.85

IT's supply/demand economics...just more narrowcasted for the specialized industry that it is. Starters should be in the 25-30K range...but you HAVE to start somewhere...I am sure Brian would 2nd that AccuSalary, but look what that job parlayed him into next .... ditto for me with NWS to now.

coriolis30, on Jul 25 2007, 09:11 AM, said:

Well, I'll agree with you there. As far as meteorologist coming out, frankly Accu-type companies don't need to may meteorologist what they are getting. In the end, you have to make your own way in this field, just like any career, and it's up to you to reach success.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 09:57 AM, said:

I honestly think your are unfairly bringing down private companies by grouping everything in with Accuweather. There are some big opportunities int the private sector (energy, aviation) that can be quite lucrative. They don't necessarily entail forecasting, it highly depends on what your into. I work for a private company (that is on government contract), its far from slave labor, and I make much more than that 26 grand starting salary at Accuweather.

-Nick
Bermuda Weather Service

neg-nao, on Jul 25 2007, 08:41 AM, said:

I will echo many of the statements on here already made, and add a bit of personal experience to the mix.

First year out of college (2000) with a B.S. in meteorology, I almost moved up to Minneapolis, MN for a job that paid between $20,000 and $23,500. Ouch.

Then I interviewed for a private company based in Madison, WI, and they had a range of $18,000 to $21,000. Super Ouch.

Then I moved into Central Illinois, where the range increased $29,000 to $34,000. Livable at least.

Now I am a government contractor working for NOAA. Of course, that salary range is the best, but I also now have a Master's Degree in Meteorology (2005).

Education makes a difference, but I also learned you gotta be willing to move and start out small. Hope this helps!

Why not simply consider meteorology as a hobby?

OSUmetstud, on Jul 25 2007, 09:22 AM, said:

Well obviously there are exceptions. But from my own experience and talking with countless other meteorologist, the major firms do tend to under pay their staff. Saying that, as I was saying, if you work hard and continue to push the boundries you can certainly end up where you are now, which I congradulate you on your success. I'm only stating that one should not rely on large weather firms to advance your career. You have to push the envelope and explore all your options, as you and I have.

winterymix, on Jul 25 2007, 09:27 AM, said:

That's always an option, however I don't know many people that spend thousands of dollars in college education for a hobby. Sometimes you might be forced to have meteorology as a secondary job with another job to take care of every day living needs.

Many METS in TV do this to start out. In my case, I was lucky enough to have family in a business sector with a lot of connections, so I'm working full time with that job and starting my own "company" with little worry about how much I make out of it. The best part, in my situation, is I am finally my own boss and put out weather products for free on my terms. I LOVE it. I make plenty of money, keep my passion alive, and I'm happy.

However, I haven't gotten to this point without working in the private sector and going all over the country. For me, family is most important so I wanted to stay in NJ/NYC area rather than move all over the place. This really depends on what you want out of life and if you are willing to move a lot. I'm ready to settle down, so this works great for me.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 09:57 AM, said:

I don't think that's true. I know of many private companies in Norman that start at 35-40 K and above for M.S. (That's pretty damn good in Norman where it costs nothing to live), and start even higher in the energy sector. That includes both larger and smaller private companies.

Just to add to the discussion. I started out in research at Rutgers U right out of school for about $35k/yr, which thankfully has gone up quite a bit after a MS degree. I know many folks who went the accuwx route and lived out of cardboard boxes for the first few years. It is a difficult to start up in the field, out of my graduating class of 11, one person went with being a professional grad student, 1 works with air quality permitting, I work with research and forecasting, the rest are doing something completely unrelated to meteorology. Once you get in and gather some experience, the pay does go up quite a bit, although you will suffer through the early years.

Idk what how far you are through a meteorology program (if your are in one at all), but here a few websites that can give you an idea about what kind of opportunities are out there. I found my job on the NWA job site.

NWA Job Page
http://www.nwas.org/jobs.html

Penn State Employment Page
http://www.met.psu.edu/Jobs/

Some salaries are posted.

Hope this helps.
-Nick

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 09:34 AM, said:

For a Masters, I would hope you'd AT LEAST make 40K.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 09:39 AM, said:

HA! That totally depends on location. In the Midwest, for a non-government job, you might be lucky to get 40k with a MS!

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 11:29 AM, said:

OKC, good to see you in NJ. I agree with you completely. As you mention pushing the envelope, to really be able to succeed in the field you really have to find your own unique niche. Some bit of experience that will differentiate you from the pack.

Just to reiterate...there will be a range in private company salaries, with some being good to their employers...others cheap. I interviewed for my first job out of school at a private company in Rockville, MD that would pay $24K per year...most of their employees lived well north and west of work to survive. I didn't feel I could manage that, so instead I took a job doing part time, behind the scenes tv stuff in Syracuse for $8.50 an hour. I worked a 2nd job at a Barnes and Noble that paid $7 per hour and lived in a tiny studio apartment, but had every single utility paid for, including internet and cable. Hell of a deal. I parlayed that into some on-air work and eventually landed the job in Utica where I'm not living like Richie Rich, but it's enough to get by and survive on. Starting salary for a met. up here was 25K...which has probably gone down a bit. And 25K to start in market 169 is outrageously good. Sub 150 tv markets on average won't pay more than 17-22 or so. I agree with what others have said....education pays....get as much of it as possible. Get your foot in the door...live check to check for a few years and then pick yourself up.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 10:39 AM, said:

Salaries mean completely different things in different parts of the country. 40 K is quite a bit in Norman, where people pay $350 a month in rent, so its a pretty good starting point. Most people here with M.S. degrees do make more than 40 K, which is why I said it was the starting point. Either way, its not even close to slave labor.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 09:50 AM, said:

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on that. We both know the work involved to get that education and I value your experience and knowledge much higher than 40K. That's just my opinion.

Mike Kruk, on Jul 25 2007, 11:24 AM, said:

I think I know which company you are talking about I lasted there 3 months at $26K before bailing.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 10:56 AM, said:

I don't work at a private weather company, I'm a Ph.D student, make a lot less than 40 K, and live very comfortably, FWIW.

In this field, YOU have to stand apart from the competition (other mets)...a private firm that has 100s of mets on staff can supply that for you, but YOU have to prove yourself better than the rest. I did that in DC in the mid 90s working for gov't contractor...made myself more valuable so salary goes up.

Ji, on Jul 25 2007, 11:05 AM, said:

You were overpaid!

my only notes on starting salary:

be sure you can cover all your bills, especially your student loans
the supply/demand portion of meteorologists and jobs works against you (especially when starting)
if you really want to do something, you will get what you want, eventually

neg-nao, on Jul 25 2007, 07:41 AM, said:

I started at AccuWeather at $23,000 in late 2003.

In the NWS, most people start between $28,000 and $45,000... that top number can be a bit higher in a really expensive area.

not enough.

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 11:56 AM, said:

Steve....Your sig file and new name are going to make it hard to distinguish you from Ruggie...

I took $15k to start at TWC back in the late 80s....it was harsh then but there were no credit cards, car payments or children to worry about...Even though I am doing quite well, I do not think I am that much better off.... Seriously, though, you have to start somewhere....TV does not pay so well either in the dumpy markets...My sister started off as a reporter in Dothan, AL in '90 for less than I did at TWC and was making almost 6 figures in Atlanta in the mid 90s before she "retired" to raising children...I would not worry as much about the early years salary as long as you keep your eye on the prize in the long run....The experience is more important than sitting on the sidelines hoping for something that pays a little more. Note how most of the successful folks posting here had some experience in the sweat shops...

famartin, on Jul 25 2007, 01:55 PM, said:

Thats a JOKE ! Close to poverty Level, and thats only one reason, I chose not to pursue a Career in MET.

College loans on top of that and many work Rotating Shifts or Crappy hours.

Just not my cup of tea, even though I have a great passion for MET. The few things I outlined, are important to me.

Ruggie

Mr Bob, on Jul 25 2007, 12:59 PM, said:

Oh yes... we all gotta do our time. My first Met job payed about $18K back in 92... and I was happy with that! Just stick with it, and opportunities will eventually open up.

20,000 is like only $1,666 a month, once you pay bills etc, your broke.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 01:00 PM, said:

The crappy stuff is only for a couple of years if you are good, and then it's on to bigger and better things.

There are some jobs in fields that have an overlap with met that pay better than $20K. There are quite a few that would pay more than $50-65K. My market value for my skills and background (including IT and some experience in project management) I think would be about $65-70K, which is what I would negotiate for.

And then there's the govt (NOAA) met jobs that pay anywhere between $30K and $150K, depending on the GS level, your education, and where the job is located, cost of living, etc...

VAwxman, on Jul 25 2007, 02:06 PM, said:

Give me straight days with weekends off and 60,000 per year !

Match me and I'm there.

Ruggie

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 01:21 PM, said:

I can't match you with that. You have no skills.

BlizzardNole, on Jul 25 2007, 07:45 AM, said:

Not quite correct. If you are STRAIGHT out of school, you will most likely start at GS 5 (which is closer to $28,000). A masters can get you GS 9... you can also get GS 9 after 3 years of slave labor at a place like AccuWeather

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 01:21 PM, said:

That would actually be about right for university faculty in meteorology and the 60 K would be for 9 months a year. Most faculty jobs start at 45-50 K and go way up, especially if you're tenured, to 80-100 K. Not bad for 9 months, work whatever hours you want, weekends and holidays off, and the ultimate job security. Anyway, for those interested in research, it's something great to shoot for.

I wonder how much AL Roker makes?

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 02:32 PM, said:

Yeah and I'm sure those types of positions are a dime a dozen !

But I do agree, thats not bad if you can land that type of position. plenty of politics to get those type positions and in knowing the right people. Most PRO METS IMO would have to be fortunate and have years of experience to land a job like that. I'm a go getter, but also a realist when it comes to thinking things out ! I would say to myself, this is abit of a fantasy job, and thinking to myself, not a great chance in that vs the gamble, time, and effort that one would have to go through in getting that type of job.

Man if I was a good looking Chick and was slutty, I would think different though !



Ruggie

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 02:50 PM, said:

huh?

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 02:32 PM, said:

Well I'm already there in my position now, with the exception of 3 months off !

I love what I do, a great company, and no big stress or bosses on my back. What makes it even better is I'm well appreciated for the job and work I do.

I still can do my hobby(Weather and Forecasting) and enjoy it, just as much.

Ruggie

As far as how my graduating classmates (Rutgers 2003) are doing... I think Ms. Dylan Dryer has been the most successful:
http://www1.whdh.com...eam/?id=BO41994

Not sure of her salary now (havn't talked to her in a few years), but I'm sure its up there!

I'm the only one of my graduating classmates in the NWS.

Jim (w7xman) was of course an observer at Mt. Washington for the last few years, but will be teaching starting this fall I believe.

There's still one guy from our class slaving away back at AccuWeather.

Not sure about the rest... I think one might be in the Air Force... another maybe working for DEP... and at least another few who are no longer in weather.

Edit: Forgot to mention John Krasting, Rutgers Grad Student as well as a fill-in TV met for one of the NYC area stations... (was WWOR but not sure if it still is)

wxtrix, on Jul 25 2007, 02:53 PM, said:

Well even though she was Ugly, does Monika and Clinton ring a bell trixie !!!

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 02:50 PM, said:

Are you saying that you'd sleep your way into a job? Shame on you. That's not a very Christian thing to do.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 02:57 PM, said:

you think female professors get tenured by sleeping around? b/c you made those comments in a post about faculty positions in meteorology.

YoRyz, on Jul 25 2007, 02:57 PM, said:

Well I'm not a chick nor am I slutty !!!

Shame on you, False accuser !

This thread is making me reconsider pursuing a career in MET.

wxtrix, on Jul 25 2007, 02:59 PM, said:

Allman told me that's what you do !

The politics section is all open for ya trixie, go fire something up over there !

It was a damn joke !!! You people have NO sense of humor !

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 03:02 PM, said:

I'm sure.

Quote

I thought jokes were supposed to be...funny?

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 01:50 PM, said:

To get tenured faculty positions, you need a Ph.D (not counting lecturing positions), which most people don't want to go through with, which is the reason why it is not an option for a lot of Pro mets, as opposed to "who you know." Faculty jobs are very realistic if you have a Ph.D, and I know 3 people off the top of my head from OU who got faculty positions right out of graduate school. I'm not going to be naive and say politics plays no part, but the way it works is you interview and give a seminar of your research, and whether you get the job or not depends mostly on how good your research is and whether your area of expertise is needed in the department. Who you worked with as your advisor also plays a role, but that's not really "who you know" since who you worked for is often your choice and is often related to how well you did in school.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 03:09 PM, said:

That's a ton of work, time, and Money for schooling Bro !

A Ph.D and too me this type job should be paying 150,000 to 250,000/ per year with 6 month off.
Plenty of loans to consider paying off over a course of many years and investing 8 years or more of your life into intense studies. Then a Spouse and Family, starts when ??? at 35 to 40 years old.

Just not worth it to me, life is too short to invest all that time and money, for that kind of pay-off is just WEAK ! When one really thinks of the sacrifices that would be involved to get there. Just My opinion though. I don't want to discourage any others, who may think differently, and have different dreams and ideas ! If that's what you want, then go for it, but do consider the time, money, and effort before committing.

Ruggie

The focus on climate change may actually help create future career opportunities.

And there's always the "sweet spot" -- finding a better-than-average paying niche that combines meteorology and another discipline. For example, there will certainly be a demand in many areas related to saving or creating energy.

It is also key to complement technical knowledge with business and communications skills. Some background in IT would also be a plus.

I'm not trying to convince you to do anything, just providing information. I should have my Ph.D when I'm 29 or 30 (God willing). As to loans, you actually get paid to get your M.S. and Ph.D in meteorology, so there is no tuition or anything to worry about. The top faculty jobs will eventually pay in the ~100 k range I think (not completely sure of that), and if you have research grants, you pay yourself out of the grant for the other 3 months, so you actually make much more than your salary if you choose. Of course, tenured jobs have pretty nice pension plans as well and the ultimate job security. So it's not nearly as weak as you're making it out to be, particularly if you like research and/or teaching.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 03:02 PM, said:

And it was a bad one. Lets leave the bad humor to the off topic side.

VAwxman, on Jul 25 2007, 02:22 PM, said:

Denise thinks differently, thats all that matters !

The starting salary for someone hired as an intern here at the Taunton office would be between $31k and $38k per year. You can expect to be making around double that within 5 years.

I used the private sector as a springboard into the the NWS. The pay here allows me to live quite comfortably.

wxmann_91, on Jul 25 2007, 02:01 PM, said:

lol, every time these threads come up I have to either pretend they don't exist or read them intentionally ignorant of the fact that it will all be applicable to me in a few years.

most people right out of college with a B.S arent going to make more than 30k per year. But once you get about 1-2 years under your belt making nothing, usually things get a lot brighter. It also depends on if you are willing to move...usually the opportunities are there if you dont mind moving for a few years.

I bet the really popular people like Topper Shutt make some good money.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 02:50 PM, said:

Ruggie: You are half way there!

Mr.B, on Jul 25 2007, 03:48 PM, said:

Yes, but he did not get there by whining about how low the starting pay is....

Mr Bob, on Jul 25 2007, 03:50 PM, said:

Bob, are you still modeling on the side for Playgirl ?

ORH_wxman, on Jul 25 2007, 02:45 PM, said:

Yeah that's another big key. If you are willing to move and you are good, then you'll find opportunites to really make some good cash (which is why I've moved so darn much the last 4 years lol). I know a lot of people that just are not willing to move, and that's fine if it's what you want, but you are really limiting your options that way.

VAwxman, on Jul 25 2007, 02:56 PM, said:

Indeed. Being mobile is key. I'm 30 yrs old and I'm living in my 4th location as a pro met.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 25 2007, 03:53 PM, said:

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 03:33 PM, said:

Attica is right. Whereas doctors, lawyers, and many other types go way into debt for grad school, our discipline actually pays you to go to school - usually either through a research or teaching assistantship. My adviser actually had four grants at the time I started by Master's program, and he let me choose which one to work off of. If you include the summer fellowship I had between grad years (through NASA - per diem rocks when you are still eating like a poor college student), I came out of school with more money than I went in with.

MEkster, on Jul 25 2007, 04:00 PM, said:

Sigh. I'm with Brett and Jim on this one. I'm plugging my ears and singing "la la la", pretending I don't hear some of this stuff.

I can't think of anything other than meteorology that I could go into, and while I was absolutely set on going into NWS originally I'm more open to other ideas now I think. I hope I am willing to move though. I think I will be.

I'm assuming if while in college I do as much research as I can and do as many internships as I can, that will help my chances of landing a job big time?

I figure getting a minor in certain areas can really enhance your job search, no? Does anyone have some advice as to what majors could be extremely beneficial in finding jobs coupled with meteorology? I'm assuming math, business maybe?

My best advice is to suck it up (i.e., the school/poor salary years) and make sure you always keep your eyes on your eventual goals. Also, always make sure to take advantage of any opportunity that presents itself.

Common theme of this thread:
- work crappy hours and pay for 2-3 years.
- MOVE TO WHERE THE jobs are.
-i did exactly that

This is my 4th met job in 16 years...each one paying more than the last...in 4 different cities. NWS, GOV'T CONTRACTOR, UTILITY, now investment bank.
Along the way, made great friends, networked with other mets, and made sacrificies to get where i am today.

I think to sum up thoughts in this tread from my point of view is that starting out in this field can be VERY painful if not almost impossible depending on where you are located. I personally would STRONGLY suggest going for a job where the cost of living is very low, like Oklahoma. That's the only way I could make it with what I was gettng paid, cause there is no way I'd make it in NJ or PA with that salary.

There's more than one way to succeed in this field was well. There are a lot of options you can take from working with a bank (commodity trading) to teaching. Really, it depends on what you want for your life style and goals. For me, although I have nothing but respect for the NWS, I'm more of a freelance type of individual and the structure with the NWS isn't my cup of tea. At the same time, I have come to absolutely loath working for a private weather company. So for me, I decided to start my own web based company, which is growing nicely. I'm taking the Metsblog approach, myself, google ads. However, I'm lucky because I can work with my family business. Not everyone can be in that position obviously.

The point is (while I continue to ramble) is that making a good living in meteorology takes patience and a lot of balls. You have to take the bad with the good, and financially there could be a lot of bad considering the cost of student loans that keep on increasing each year. However, if you want it, you can do it.

With all the talent here we should start our own weather company. Who wants to get us started?

Mr.B, on Jul 25 2007, 02:34 PM, said:

Al Roker isn't even a degreed meteorologist. He was probably making a pretty good amount when he was soley at WNBC , since of course thats market 1, and is surely making much more now...

I'm not sure why there's such a fuss, the pay isn't the best at the start, but not many jobs are. If you REALLY love meteorology, you'll just have to stick it out for a few years, you'll be doing what you love! Maybe you won't be able to live in an expensive area, but you gotta do what you gotta do.


Could someone (Attica, or otherwise) explain this masters thing? You do reasearch for your masters and get paid for it? No tuition or fees?Is this everywhere?

nynjpaweather, on Jul 25 2007, 03:06 PM, said:

Oh c'mon, you're telling me you didn't absolutely LOVE working for WeatherBank?

WeatherFox, on Jul 25 2007, 03:18 PM, said:

Isn't that what they tried to do over at StormVista?

MonsonWeather, on Jul 25 2007, 05:24 PM, said:

Sure.

I guess "paid" is a strong word. I should have said you get a stipend. For a Masters student, you get somewhere in the area of 18 to 22 K a year (I started at 19 K I think) depending on where you go to school. Typically, you also get a tuition waiver so you don't have to pay tuition. This is true for virtually all graduate programs. However at OU, you do have to pay fees, which work out to about ~$1000 a semester, but you get about 20% of that back in taxes. Programs try to increase stipends as university fees increase; that has happened 2 or 3 times here since I got here. OU also provides some low-grade health insurance for free, but I know that is not the case everywhere. If you have a research assistantship, you get all of this stuff in return for doing research under whomever's grant you're working under. In other words, the money is coming from the research grant that your advisor has. If you don't have an advisor and/or a grant to work under, you typically have a teaching assistantship, where you T.A. a certain number of hours per week, (whether that be teaching a class, a lab, or grading for undergrads) and your stipend, etc. comes from the university and the meteorology department. Grad programs will usually first accept you with a TA offer, and then if a particular faculty member wants to work with you, they will give you a research assistantship offer. Some programs (I think) makes everyone TA at first, and then find someone to work with. If you can't find anyone who has a grant for you to work under, you'll have to TA your entire time along with doing your research and taking classes. But a lot of times, people will TA for a year, develop their interests, find someone to work for and then spend their second and possibly third year under a research assistantship where they no longer have to TA and can focus on classes and research. The stipend isn't great, but its enough to pay the bills and not go into anymore debt, all while you're getting another degree. All in all, I think it's a pretty good deal.

As you move onto the Ph.D level, if you are so inclined, you get a bigger stipend (more like 20-23 K) along with all the other stuff. Hope that clarifies things for you.

Seems like we should start a list of our 'favorite' weather starter-jobs... i.e. sweat shops! And then claim you affiliation...

I can think of the following... but please feel free to add to the list!


Accuweather (of course)
WeatherBank
WeatherData
Meteorlogix / DTN
Impact Weather
?


I personally did a 6-month stint at WeatherData... that's all I could take!

At Penn State there is no TA requirement. If you're on a grant you're set. (no matter the semester). at least thats my experience.

thetavsubrho, on Jul 25 2007, 05:56 PM, said:

Thanks for the clarification.

Great thread, wish I was in on it in its earlier stages. I didn't read it in its entirety, so if I'm redundant here... just keep reading.

I saw that someone mentioned different salaries mean different things in varying locations. That is ABSOLUTELY the case, and was a factor I overlooked in my decision to accept my job here in West Virginia.

In the TV business, its a pay-your-dues business, and in fact, if very successful, you will someday most likely be doing less work for MUCH more money.

I took the first job I was offered, and being from western New York, the cost of living can be "up there". When I was offered a salary, I literally laughed to myself. It took one of my friends to go "Bob, see how much it costs to live down there!" You cannot believe the apartment I live in, for 400 a month, thats after paying all utilities, a LOADED satellite service (including HD.) Granted I have a roommate, but you make due.

I also have a second job right now at Blockbuster, 10-15 hours a week... lets just say for the record that I make less that $23K a year. You know how I know that I love meteorology? Because I have not waken up one day in this 14 months and complained about going to work, despite the paycheck.

Now the pay scale in TV is more exponential that a lot of the other areas, provided you work hard, are very good at what you do, and get lucky. Like Utica said, 17-22k is normal in market 160 or smaller, but then your jump EASILY increases your pay almost double or more after two years, if you get into a top 75 market. You make it to NY, well head on over to the Beemer dealership and pick out something nice. Perks increase in markets as well... right now I get free gym membership, dry cleaning, haircuts, teeth cleanings, golf, and not to mention the "WDTV discount" at several places. All of those things subtract from costs I would normally be paying for... so that technically boosts your salary. I just can't wait until I start getting my wardrobe paid for

Regardless, unless you have a big degree and get incredibly lucky, you aren't going to have a mansion with a Mercedes in the garage for your first few years. Keep your eyes on the prize, and if you enjoy it, then who cares.

A wise man once said its better to make little and love your job than make a ton and hate it.

I can say I love my job, the rest comes second.

Personally, I thinks its total BS that you guys get paid to go to school. No wonder you guys keep hyping global warming...keep the research grants coming.... smile.gif


for me it was actually MS

thetavsubrho, on Jul 25 2007, 07:37 PM, said:

I deleted I was kidding and didn't want to piss off anyone.

march58, on Jul 25 2007, 07:39 PM, said:

I wouldnt worry about it....
Ive seen far worse in the last week.

Plus it was kinda funny.

march58, on Jul 25 2007, 07:39 PM, said:

In all seriousness I started at Accuweather in 98' or 99' can't remember and opened up at 20,500 as a starting salary.....I left in 2001 making 25,000 with comp time added in (kind of like overtime). Thats kind of what its like the first few years in the industry. Some folks find an opening thereafter and explode to much bigger and better fates while some remain in the sweat shops for the rest of their lives....I feel like a lot happens in the 2-5 years after graduation and thats the critical time in your career.

Doppler Bob, on Jul 25 2007, 04:34 PM, said:

I worked at Blockbuster when I was in college and for a short few months afterward, and just before I left (for the sweatshop!) I was running the store when the store manager went on vacation... Just proof you can go far with Blockbuster in your resume

A friend of mine that graduated from LSC started at a TV station in Gainesville in 2001 at $19K. I believe his 2nd year he was to make $21k.

Way back in the early 80's when looking for colleges etc. I ran a computer program on Meteorology (I had just been accepted to PSU for MET) and Accounting which I had recently taken a couple of classes in during my Junior year of High School. The program ranked career's based on both current and future opportunities and advancement. At the time it ranked 150 professions and Accounting came out #6 and Meteorology was #126. Although I love MET (remember this way before TWC and today's increased focus on weather on local news) I chose Accounting. I was very very lucky in that I did Accounting and Finance for 12 years before branching off into sales in 1997 ( which has been much more lucrative) I started back in 1985 with a BS in Accounting at a small oil company at just $13,500. I am fortunate to work in an industry (Pharma Sales) where my current quarterly target bonus is that starting salary......... on top of a base salary that is 11 times my starting salary out of school.

Although I love MET.. I made the right call - especially now that my wife is expecting our second child (A Boy) to go with our 2 year old daughter in early September.

I hope all of you get to do what you love and get paid a fair amount for doing it.

Best of Luck

Paul

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 06:40 PM, said:

Yeah, some places are lower and some higher. I've heard of $30K+ in California, meanwhile mine was a little over $13K at North Dakota. But when you get a grad student apartment for $260/mo, it works out ok.

For any of those thinking about grad school, I'd highly recommend not only researching the schools you are looking at, but the individual professors. Find out what areas they are working in, and what grants they have.

Besides research and teaching assistantships, you can apply for various fellowships that will give you money. Unlike assistantships, fellowships typically require no work obligation to the department while you're in your first year of grad school. Obviously, you still have to make satisfactory progress toward your degree, but they normally come in lieu of a first year TA or RA. In addition, they are usually merit based and not need based, which therefore, makes them prestigious awards that can boost a resume. I applied for the Industry/Government graduate fellowship from the American Meteorological Society and got one (long story, but I'll spare the details). Even though it is for one academic year, it contains a $22,000 stipend and I will not have to be a TA for my first year of grad school at Penn State. Yes, the tuition waiver still applies for fellowships too. This will enable me to focus more on my coursework and find a research project more quickly since I won't be grading labs and whatnot. Many universities will offer fellowships to outstanding incoming grad students too. It requires some extra application work to apply for one, but it can be well worth the extra hassle if you receive a fellowship.

Although Penn State does not have a TA requirement, the majority of incoming students (I believe 70 to 80%) come in as TAs and find a research adviser during their first year. Since I'm not 100% certain on what my research interest is, I am taking this route (except that I won't be a TA, of course).

If you have the passion for meteorology, you will take some chances to get a career going (we all have to start somewhere). As for me, I started in TV while finishing up college (an internship led right into a job). While I liked what I did there, it turned out to be not for me (my career goal was to work for the NWS). Getting into the NWS back then (late '90s) was difficult plus I needed to get more experience under my belt therefore I applied to some private companies. I started at AccuWeather in 2000 and was there for nearly 3 years, as I got a job with the NWS. So as you can tell, I have experienced the media, private, and the government sectors all within a span of about 5 years. I was so happy to be able to reach my goal and I love the job I have.

When we have students come into the NWS office and intern with us, I try to tell them to get as much experience as they can under their belt before graduating college (get involved with internships, projects, research, etc). It continues to be more and more important these days to have experience. Yes education is very important, however experience is very very important. The more you can show someone what you have to offer, just might top another applicant and bam you are in. It appears that the competition for meteorology jobs continues to increase, so anything you can do to add to your resume will help, as you want to make yourself standout from the other applicants.

MGorse, on Jul 25 2007, 08:07 PM, said:

Interesting!

Not sure if this is a valid question of if there is an actual answer, but I'm aware that a lot of Rutgers students intern at OKX and PHI. If a kid interns for 1, 2, or 3 (or more?) years there, how much does it help him to get a job at said location? Is it just for experience and won't help you get into that NWS office at all or will it actually help you? Thanks.

MSquared, on Jul 25 2007, 07:05 PM, said:

Along with AMS fellowships, individual departments will sometimes have fellowships. I've had a fellowship from OU for two years, and its for an additional $5000 a year for up to 5 years added on to my stipend, which is pretty awesome.

WeatherFox, on Jul 25 2007, 06:18 PM, said:

Attention: There is going to be a CHALLENGER to The Weather Channel....Something I have a vision to do...TWC sucks soooo bad that the timing is right for competition...Need investors and a plan...of course...

PS- Imagine MAP DISCUSSIONS on LIVE TV as models roll out...Live Blogging.... Tropical Roundtable...Take that Storm Stories!

In the age where there is a Medical Channel and a Military Channel...which are great products...there has GOT to be a niche market for a fresh METEOROLOGY NETWORK.

coriolis30, on Jul 25 2007, 08:13 PM, said:

I can't WAIT!

LocoAko, on Jul 25 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

That is a valid question imo. Yeah, we do have quite a few students intern with us (PHI) from Rutgers. Actually we have 2 this summer, but also have students from many other colleges around the area. At least at my office, usually the internship is for a semester or a summer/winter period. After interning at an NWS office, that could help you somewhat to get a job with the NWS as you have already been exposed to the operations side, however the chances of getting in at the office you interned at is not high. That all depends on the job vacancies that are posted and if that particular office has an opening that you are qualified for. Experience and even additional education will really help you as that gets you more points during the application process.

MGorse, on Jul 25 2007, 08:20 PM, said:

Ah thanks! I sort of never thought about how much competition there is for these internships. Oy. I guess I meant moreso that if there was an open spot at an office and they were taking applicants, if a student spent semesters interning at that specific office would it help them among others not only because they're in the NWS but because they were at THAT station? Or does it just lend experience to get into the NWS in general but they don't care where you interned exactly?

Either way, a positive experience all around. I guess grad school is looking likely.

LocoAko, on Jul 25 2007, 08:22 PM, said:

Assuming you already have your degree. By student interning at that office and a spot opened up, that would give you an advantage, but you never know who you are running up against. If you were let's say an NWS intern at that office and a spot opened up that you qualify for, then you would have an advantage over others since you are already there. In general, the experience you gain will really help you out. Also I would like to add, that if you intern at an NWS office (or anywhere else), your involvement there will reflect on you to. Keep that in mind if applying for a job at that location.

LocoAko, on Jul 25 2007, 05:10 PM, said:

It certainly can help for that location... but of course, you have to be lucky enough for there to be an opening pretty soon after you graduate, or your hands might get tied elsewhere. I student interned at PHI, the next met intern spot didn't open until 2 years after a graduated (which I wouldn't have gotten because Lee stole that ). Then the next opened in 2006 but someone working on their masters who also was a student intern stole that up...

In any case, it all worked out, since I'm probably paying half what I'd be paying to live in NV versus NJ, while making significantly more And, the promotion opportunities out in the empty west seem to come along a bit more often...

MGorse, on Jul 25 2007, 08:31 PM, said:

Sounds good! With any luck I'll be working shifts with you in a year or two!

since I'm retired and have a good pension I'll come and work for minimum wage. I can sweep up and make coffee.

famartin, on Jul 25 2007, 08:32 PM, said:

You are not bitter, are you?

LocoAko, on Jul 25 2007, 08:33 PM, said:

Nice!

MGorse, on Jul 25 2007, 05:37 PM, said:

Not about that first one, no... Lee DID pay his dues, after all... The second one, maybe

famartin, on Jul 25 2007, 08:39 PM, said:

LOL

I figured you were going to answer with something like that.

uncle w1, on Jul 25 2007, 08:34 PM, said:

In memory of Tex Antoine we would hire you in a heartbeat

Nice thread guys. I am just about to start college and train to become a pro met. I got a good belt of experience behind me already. With a 6 month internship, job shadows, lots of personal study, etc. I am thinking of going for my masters and landing a TV job somewhere. I want to be on the tv screen. lol I would expect with that to start out at 30-40k and quickly rise after that. The guys I have worked with out here have all said they make 100k or higher a year..in Portland Oregon. Some as high as 150k, and all with a bs. I dont think I will have trouble as long as I stick to my guns. Maybe get a sweat shop job for a year or two. haha I have decent looks and a passion for weather. That should get me somewhere!

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 06:40 PM, said:

I have to give a warning here:

A stipend for masters or phd is NOT always guaranteed. I was one of the unlucky ones who had to pay his way through grad school for a masters degree... which I have gotten. I am technically in the PhD program, but I have told my advisor this:

"Look, Dr. xxxx, I am in a tight financial spot and as much as I would love to pursue this PhD research, I cannot do this without financial support. I was able to pay my way through my masters program, but I cannot say I can and will do the same for a PhD. Unless I get financial support within a year, I will have to suspend my PhD research and I will not make it available for anyone to view. I must get paid for my work, otherwise I will get a job and find a way to support myself with or without a PhD."

I was pretty strong and a little harsh in my wording, but my advisor did get the point.

So, in a nutshell, funding for masters students is not guaranteed, and is even less likely to be provided than to PhD students.

Me and some other students had a meeting with the UM professors today on basically this subject. They (this is for grad school) cover tuition and start at a stipend of $2000 a month, there are raises as you achieve more. Really, an awesome deal, its one of the hardest programs to get into in the nation though, only 21 students total in the whole program.

Terpeast, on Jul 25 2007, 08:12 PM, said:

I've never heard of this happening before for a Ph.D, that stinks. I know a few people who were told there would be no funding for a semester or two on their Masters. At OU, you get an offer from the university and unless you fail out or do something stupid or take 5 years and your funding runs out, they pay you. I assume you were told going in you weren't guaranteed funding? I would never work for a university on a Ph.D unless I was getting paid. They take too long to not get paid.

Either way, I know tons of Ph.D students at many different schools, and every single one is funded in some way, even if they have to TA. So I wouldn't say that Ph.D funding is "less likely". I would say virtually everyone who is accepted gets paid and if not, they are told ahead of time, so they can politely decline the offer. Did you have to pay tuition along with not getting paid? And were there others who were the same way where you are?

Anyway, I hope you get some money for your work.

After reading this thread, I fear for next Spring when I graduate with my BS. It looks like I may have 2, or even 3 jobs to try to make ends meet!

I wonder what JB started at?

neg-nao, on Jul 25 2007, 08:28 PM, said:

I don't know FOR SURE... its an educated guess based on what I heard about other people's starting salaries back then... but I THINK it was around 10K.

LocoAko, on Jul 25 2007, 08:10 PM, said:

It helps, even if it's just one semester as a volunteer. Off the top of my head at least three or four people currently at OKX were student volunteers at OKX sometime in the past (going by the volunteer log book and what I've asked those forecasters, journeymen and met/HMT interns) Hopefully, in 9 months, it helps me.

Also related extracurricular activities and any research opportunities (I'm currently an undergrad research assistant too) you get will help a lot. The application process for the NWS jobs involves a point system based on experience in various facets, so the experience as a volunteer will definitely come in handy.

famartin, on Jul 25 2007, 11:32 PM, said:

Wow, if I interned all year 3 days a week (like i do now) I would make more than that

This is a terrific thread. The timing is excellent as well -- bit of a lull here in the summer.

Attica, can you shed some light on the process to get a faculty (eventually tenured) position in terms of moving around? I've heard that you should not get your Master's and PhD from the same university that awarded you a Bachelor's. I'm seriously thinking about doing Penn State's IUG (Integrated Undergraduate/Graduate) program and then heading somewhere else for a PhD. I hope that doing something like this would still be acceptable to PhD programs. Do you know of anyone who had attended school Y for undergrad, school X for grad/PhD, and found a nice position back at school Y after receiving the PhD? I will admit, probably THE dream job for me would be a tenured professorship in PSU's meteo department, for a number of reasons, but my academic career is young and I have a lot of exploring to do.

On another note, I am having a hard time finding an area of meteorology that significantly interests me more than other areas. I have always had a deep, deep interest/passion for winter storms, but I fear that going into synoptic could present grant problems as it may not pose as large of a threat to society as climate change, severe weather, etc. I do wonder if there's even something I haven't considered at all, such as cloud physics, that I might be interested in but wouldn't know about since I haven't taken enough meteo courses yet. PSU just had a truly bright and outgoing student graduate from the IUG program with a BS degree in mathematics, and I think he is going to CalTech this autumn for cloud physics (at least that's what his PSU research was about).

To make a long question short, what area of meteorology do you (and everyone else) foresee as a valuable area to society for quite some time? Perhaps you see each area as equal to each other.

It is nice to hear some positive thoughts about academia. It's my goal to be a meteo professor, but I was kind of down in the dumps earlier this summer about it -- probably because not that many people do it/want to do it. I've been lured into thinking about other, more common jobs to go through the usual stages of life. Nope. That's not for me. We hear frequently in school all about changing the world, being leaders, etc., and ignoring those words of advice for the simpler life would be foolish--to me at least. Professors get to do all sorts of stuff. They have academic freedom, right? They get to teach classes, travel, consult for the government, and probably many other things that I have no idea about. I would also imagine that holding a PhD would get you started off nicely at the NWS or an energy trading firm if you wanted out of academia.

* Edit to CMA on the last paragraph. I don't want to offend anyone regarding their profession. I'm just saying that if the opportunity and will are there, why not make a run for it?

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 12:57 AM, said:

I will say that it is tougher to move after your MS to another school for your PhD than it is to move from one school for your BS to another for your MS. It's not impossible, it's just not done that much and can occasionally be viewed as there being some sort of "trouble" on either your end or the previous school's end. In meteorology, it doesn't hurt to get your graduate degrees from somewhere other than where you get your undergraduate degree, but it also doesn't hurt nearly as much to do them all at the same place as it would in larger fields. It really depends on the person you talk to, though -- there are staunch advocates on both sides, particularly on the side of different locations.

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 12:57 AM, said:

thanks ! I try my best to contribute to this board

Clark, on Jul 25 2007, 10:01 PM, said:

I never quite understood that... what is the reasoning of going to different schools?

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 01:04 AM, said:

The biggest claim that I hear is about "getting different experiences." Mostly, each school is going to have different faculty with different viewpoints, etc. and some feel that it is best to be exposed to two sets of those viewpoints rather than just one during one's studies.

Personally, I don't know how much I buy into that, given that I think most people who make it to graduate school (and many who don't) are capable of thinking for themselves and applying what they learn rather than just accepting what is fed to them. Sure, there are different mindsets you can get by going elsewhere, but you can also get those just by networking in the field, doing internships, and things of that ilk. So, color me skeptical of those arguments, though I do freely admit that there's not necessarily much downside in going somewhere else. I just don't agree with those who feel that you need to go someplace else no matter what -- even if there are great opportunities for you at your current school.

*Everyone else's mileage may vary. I've practiced what I preach and am at FSU for my third degree, so I may not be the most partial observer

Clark, on Jul 26 2007, 01:16 AM, said:

What research are you doing at FSU?

Clark, on Jul 26 2007, 12:16 AM, said:

At this juncture I have absolutely no idea how far I'll go in academia (hopefully at least M.S. though, especially judging by the info in this thread). However, I've already got a sinking feeling in my stomach when it comes to this whole business of "diversifying your experience." I'm pretty sure I'd like to stay right where I am for the remainder of my schooling, be it B.S., M.S. or Ph.D, for a wide variety of reasons ranging from financial to simply being where I've gotten comfortable. However, from what I hear, a lot of the faculty here is firmly on the side of two different schools. This should make for an interesting next couple years, to say the least, as I juggle options of not only whether to pursue an advanced degree, but whether I'm shooting myself in the foot by doing it here.

turtlehurricane, on Jul 26 2007, 01:22 AM, said:

To avoid taking this thread off the topic at hand, I'll just say 'a little bit of everything' dabbling around various aspects of tropical meteorology. My webpage has a bit more specific information, just take the "wrf" or "reports" off of the end of either link in my sig.

brettjrob, on Jul 26 2007, 01:32 AM, said:

I was pretty much in the same boat a few years ago when making my grad school choice, except for the faculty being on the side of "two different schools." FSU, if anything, takes a large number of its own undergrads as graduate students; I don't think the faculty really has a strong opinion one way or the other on the matter. But, in talking with other professors elsewhere when looking into grad school, I definitely found that there are others elsewhere who feel very strongly about students attending two different schools. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.

Clark, on Jul 26 2007, 01:33 AM, said:

I see you've done alot of work on extratropical cyclones. I'll probably read those reports later, they would be very good references for the latter half of my 91L case study.

As for the main topic that started this thread -- it's all really a matter of what you make of it for yourself, which I don't think is too different from what everyone else is saying. Your initial earning potential is going to be higher with a graduate degree, either MS or PhD, and there are certain positions that you can get to only if you have some form of a graduate degree. That's not to say, however, that if you decide to end your schooling with a BS that you won't end up making more substantial money down the line; it's just a matter of what you do with your education once you get your foot in the door somewhere.

Increasingly the field seems to be favoring those with graduate degrees over those with only BS degrees unless you are in broadcast (where a graduate degree is probably overkill) or you already have connections to some job in the field (e.g. being a SCEP student at an NWS office as an undergrad). I would say it is probably easier to get into a better position from the outset if you have a graduate degree, but of course it does involve usually 18-36 months of additional work for the MS. Not everyone wants to -- or can -- go for a graduate degree, though.

The last figures I heard cited by the AMS for starting salaries in the field had a big gap between BS and MS and a smaller one between MS and PhD. The latter two were somewhere in the low-mid $40k and upper $40k range, respectively, if I remember correctly. Your mileage may vary.

Tempest, on Jul 25 2007, 09:08 PM, said:

Its great that you want your masters, but I would honestly consider it a waste of time if you plan on going into the TV world. Thats 2 to 4 years more of experience in the business, when all you'll really be doing during that time is research. TV is an experience based business, and that time you spend in grad school would almost be consider "wasted". I'm in NO WAY slamming grad school whatsoever, but with that prospective employers will immediately assume you expect more pay, something many cannot offer in a starter market.

Secondly, I'm not sure where you think you are going to make 30-40k a year fresh out of school, that would be insanely high. I'm not trying to discourage you, but I had much of the same as you, a great internship which led to a part time job my senior year, a sick tape, and I even ran the college TV station weather department and I am making about half of your expected starting salary at my first job. Now your second job, after a year and a half to two years, should easily fall into your range.

Here's another TV perspective:

It's all about connections and getting your foot in the door in a good market either by working part time or even weather producing there. Go above and beyond during your first opportunity, practice in front of the key all the time, give ideas, offer to report, etc etc etc. Then you'll be able to land a high paying job in a good market without having to travel too far from home.

I started off going to Grad School in Albany for meteo. I think my stipend was in the low 20s. While I was there I worked part time at the local NBC affiliate (I think I made like 12 bucks an hour) doing some mornings and noons.... and weekends. I worked holidays (thanksgiving, christmas, labor day) and offered as much as I could. I worked the morning show (3am-9am) on days I had exams (most notably a 4 hours fluid mechanics exam) and never turned down the chance to work.

The pay off? Within 4 months I landed a job at the NBC O&O in Hartford working part time (weekend am's) while going to school and teaching full time during the week... shortly after I was offered a full time job with a competitive salary for a top-30 market. I've been here full time for a year and absolutely love it.

How'd I get the job? I interned in college here at NBC30... learned all I could about the computer graphics... and was able to actually "help" out behind the scenes... as opposed to just sitting around. I also made tapes and came back during my vacations to help out during svr wx or winter storms to be an extra set of eyes and hands in the wxr office. They liked me and were desperate for someone to freelance for a few weekend mornings.

I graduated college in 2005 and I'm 23... it's all about making connections... making sacrifices and knowing what you want.

If you have the look and personality for TV... and don't mind working long hours, holidays, commuting long distances, working two jobs etc at first... you can get rewarded VERY fast.

I'm shocked by the amount of people who say they want to do TV and are passionate about it. And then they get an internship or a first job and don't really go above and beyond. Make yourself known... work hard... and be smart. It will pay off.

Ryan

Doppler Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 03:36 AM, said:

rfhpsu, on Jul 26 2007, 03:29 AM, said:

I now dub thee an official "crackhead"

I don't see the reason for dismay among some folks here who are considering or already pursuing meteorology. It's really pretty simple. If you prove yourself, and are willing to move around some, then you have a good shot. Also, as a couple of others have mentioned, networking with others is key, as it never hurts to have connections in the field that can help you move up the ladder of success.

crack probably would have helped the situation. Got a 75 on the exam... passed!

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 06:37 AM, said:

The one thing I forgot to add is if there are any college students out there who have specific questions... don't hesitate to send me a message or email. I went to grad school (although i dropped out ) and did tv as well... so I have a different perspective than many.

rfhpsu, on Jul 26 2007, 06:29 AM, said:

Hey guys i've been working 28yrs i'm 45 yrs old i have 4 herniated discs ano wrecked shoulders with osteo stop whining i'm retiring soon and moving to a warm climate .Stop whining just work hard bust your ass and people will notice yeah i have alot of toys was it worth it maybe but i'm beyond that you pencil pushers are killing me.The people going into this line of work must have a passion for it so don't worry about salary like some of the oldtimers are telling you just put yourself above the rest see ya.

mulen, on Jul 26 2007, 06:32 AM, said:

Best statement yet! You will NOT be successful if you're going after the money in this field... it has to be about your passion for weather. If you are passionate about what you do, the opportunities will come. I never ever thought I'd make much money at all doing weather... I just knew I loved it, and wanted to do 'whatever' it lead me to. Now 12 years after graduating, I am amazed at where I'm at... waaaay exceeded my expectations! So do it for the love of the weather... and don't worry about the cash.

Well said... I did the same weekend/help out gig like you did my junior/senior years of undergrad, and in that time I made a tape.
And you hit it on the head about connections and sacrifices... I've made plenty of both myself.

I find it pretty amazing myself at how quickly people lose interest in this business while just starting or even before starting off. Its all there, its just not "easy" to find like a typical broadcasting job could be. I think the fact of the matter is that the key to early success is to start off long before your career actually begins. College TV, internships which lead to part time work in a real station, etc help you immensely. I remember researching the job market a year and a half before I even graduated, just to have a feel for how jobs came/went etc.

rfhpsu, on Jul 26 2007, 06:29 AM, said:

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 25 2007, 09:40 PM, said:

re bolded statement, I'm sorry I wasn't clear. I meant to say that funding for masters is less likely than for PhD... at my school, they paid the PhD students first and foremost, then they pay the masters students.

Their excuse was that budget is tight, they never had enough money for all of the students - but I think it's a total BS excuse. They just didn't want to pay me. Get my masters on my own money, fine. But for PhD? No f*cking way! I told my professors that I'm not sharing my research with anyone until I get paid for my work. And if I'm not getting paid within a year or so, I'm outta there.

So meanwhile, I am looking for jobs - particularly government jobs because since I have a masters, I already qualify for the GS-9 pay band (here in DC, it's about $50-65K or so). With just one more year of meteorological experience, I'd move up to GS-11. So with some persistence and a stroke of luck, I'll get a job soon that pays enough for me to pay off all my student loan debt in one single shot.

RiemannSun, on Jul 25 2007, 11:57 PM, said:

You heard right, I respectfully disagree with Clark in this regard. I would recommend against getting all three degrees at the same university. A large majority of faculty that I have come across at both departments I've been in tend to look down upon this, and I have heard more than once that this can hurt you when you try to apply for faculty positions. Getting a B.S. and M.S. at one place and then a Ph.D someplace else sounds like a perfectly fine plan, though most people get their B.S. at one place and then get their M.S. and Ph.D someplace else. If you do go the B.S./M.S. at one university route, then just make sure you do a good job on your M.S. so you'll be attractive to other schools for your Ph.D.

Fair or unfair, getting all three degrees at one place raises the question of whether someone was exposed to enough different classes, faculty members, other students, and viewpoints during their education, whether they were significantly challenged or found a comfort zone and cruised, and whether they forged enough relationships with faculty members around the country to colloborate on research wherever they end up. There are so many great departments and faculty members, staying in one location is doing yourself somewhat of a disservice, IMO. Even if you feel you have great opportunities at one university, leaving for an M.S. and then coming back for a Ph.D would be greatly beneficial for your future career. Obviously, not everyone agrees, this is just my opinion on the matter.

RiemannSun, on Jul 25 2007, 11:57 PM, said:

There is a severe shortage of synoptic meteorology Ph.D's developing. Most students' current interests are in mesoscale whether it be severe weather, tropical, etc. If you're interested in synoptic, and want to get a Ph.D, you are in a great place, IMO. Many departments are having a very difficult time finding synopticians for their departments. Regardless of whether there may be other areas of meteorology that are more important in the future, synoptic is a backbone of meteorology programs, they all need to have it, and there are going to be fewer people available.

RiemannSun, on Jul 25 2007, 11:57 PM, said:

Couldn't agree more.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 09:21 AM, said:

Quick question... for those stopping at the M.S. level, is it still crucial to diversify your schools, or would a B.S./M.S. combo from OU be as good as any in terms of employability?

brettjrob, on Jul 26 2007, 10:17 AM, said:

No, its not crucial at all I don't think. I think a lot of people who know they are going to stop at M.S. stay at their school. The diversifying is much more important for Ph.Ds.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 10:21 AM, said:

Thanks, that's what I figured. Right now I'm too overwhelmed by all the options I'll have when I graduate (2 more years) to worry about it too much, but it's good to know an M.S. here is probably a good route no matter what I ultimately go on to do.

brettjrob, on Jul 26 2007, 12:21 PM, said:

Yes, a masters will take you a long way with better pay... no matter which field you end up in.

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 09:43 AM, said:

A masters, or a couple of years at a sweat shop

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 12:44 PM, said:

Yeah, and one might say I'm in a sweat shop right now

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 10:21 AM, said:

See, that's my biggest qualm with that mindset. If you've stayed at one school long enough to get all three degrees there, you've been there generally 7-10 years. In that time, there are going to be multiple groups of students coming and going and non-significant faculty turnover. The rest of it is up to the student and, IMO, isn't really impacted by whether you stay at one place or go elsewhere -- did you take the classes that were offered at your school even if they weren't in your area of expertise? Did you actually attend conferences and seek out those in your area of expertise to make contacts, establish partnerships, and that sort of thing? And, most importantly, I strongly feel that a student's work and CV are going to speak for themselves. If they were challenged (by others or by themselves), it is going to show in their work and CV; if they weren't, it's also going to show up there. Either way, it is going to show up whether they stayed at one school or went elsewhere for their graduate studies.

I've never noticed any troubles for anyone I've known who has done all three degrees at one place, so I can only speak to that end of the argument. Perhaps it's a split on the eastern and western half of the US -- it's the schools out west (basically of the Mississippi River) where I've noticed it being more of a "concern" than those here in the east. I just personally think that the views of some in the field (and I'm not lumping you in here) that change is more important than the quality of one's work as well as that students must go elsewhere no matter what excellent opportunities may be available for them at the same school where they completed their undergrad are incredibly closed-minded

In the parts of this field that I've seen, it's the quality of one's work that matters far more than where they went to school and if they changed schools between undergrad and graduate work. As has been hinted at many times here, it's all a matter of what you do for yourself in this field. Change for change's sake can be good at times, but if the grass is greener where you already are...

Just my two cents.

Thank you for the stellar replies! I especially like the news that there should still be a demand for synopticians in the future.

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 01:13 PM, said:

And I'm wondering if they still can't find synopticans with a PhD, will they start hiring those with a masters? They may not have a choice but to do that!

I contemplated grad school awhile back, but glad I didn't choose that route now the way things have worked out. Not sure I could have gotten back into all the math lol.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 10:17 AM, said:

That's the number one reason I didn't go

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 01:20 PM, said:

Ahh, it's not that bad

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 10:25 AM, said:

Yeah, I know, just annoying as hell

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 01:17 PM, said:

Brian, In all honesty The Math is really what prevented me from going to school for Meteorology. I figured 2-1/2 years of Tough math and Science, and 1-1/2 years of actual Meteorology too me was B.S.

Thousands of dollars for College and racking my brains out in something I have no interest in (Math) just didn't make sense to me. I said to myself we have all this technology and computers to do these calculations, why the Hell would someone have to spend 2/3 rds of their Schooling in MATH, when Meteorology and forecasting is what is really of my interest !!!

Then on top of that I stated my other reasons, too which you know !

And Yes I have Skills Cuzzz !

Ruggie

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:29 PM, said:

Exactly, it's why I switched out of Meteo last year and into Business and Economics. I figure I can still use my meteo skills I picked up as a hobby and then reap the rewards of a much higher starting salary, with the massive amount of money I'll owe when I get out of college. Plus the math and physics was getting steadily worse until it became just about unbearable for me. Those were never my best subjects and I was having a tough time with high school stuff, getting slammed with impossible to solve integrals was not my cup of tea. I might go for a meteo Minor which could still enable me to have a career dealing with weather somewhere, weather derivatives and energy look like great fields and that's where I'm concentrating now.

Question: I just perused the PSU meteo department's professors' pages and none of them listed "synoptic meteorology" as a research interest. However, I did see things such as "synoptic dynamics." This may sound very silly, but I am ignorant -- can synopticians be classified as dynamicists? From the small amount of dynamics I've seen, I enjoy the topic so far (analysis of wind flow, the math/equations, etc., right?).

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:29 PM, said:

If $60k and M-F is all you need then you actually chose the wrong way, Cuzzzzzzzz.....

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

They're both similar, but their approaches are a little different. Dynamics covers all types of fluids (whereas the atmosphere is just one type) and is much more heavily involved with the math - google "geophysical fluid dynamics" and you'll get an idea. The math in dynamics is usually what scares people off or weeds non-serious students out of this field.

Synoptics doesn't involve as much math and narrows GFD down to one type of fluid - the atmosphere - and also narrows it down to scales of approx 1,000-10,000 km. Also much more discussion on common meteorological phenomena, such as cut off lows, jet streaks, etc...

Clark, on Jul 26 2007, 11:49 AM, said:

For the most part, I don't disagree with what you're saying, though I may say I think you're being somewhat idealistic. While departments will respond to the quality of your research, etc., they will not just look at your work and CV.

To a certain degree, I disagree about the importance of change. I think potential employers consider whether someone has been to more than one university and succeeded as a bonus. They are, after all, making an important decision about their department and I think, generally, they feel more comfortable if someone has done great work at more than one university. If someone has done excellent work, great; if they did it at more than one university, even better. I would not call this approach close-minded, however your point about taking the best opportunities available to you is certainly well-taken, and probably should be weighed the most when making such a decision.

In the end, my advice, from a strictly professional point of view, would still be to switch universities at some point, everything else being equal, simply because of the number of faculty members that believe it is important, rightly or wrongly.

jm1220, on Jul 26 2007, 01:41 PM, said:

It's really a shame there's no programs other than the Military, that one can get training or have a 2 year program for only forecasting and Basic Meteorology. I would have pursued a career if much of it was MET, but most is MATH to which I was nothing more than a B or Average student in the subject, I really had no big interest in Scientific math.

I basically came to grips and said this road to becoming a meteorologist Isn't for me. But forecasting, and the passion I have for weather, has always been with me since I was a Kid. So like you, It's my Hobby, and I enjoy forecasting and having all this wonderful weather information at hand, on the internet.

Good Luch in whatever you do.
Ruggie

Mr Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 01:45 PM, said:

Much more too it than that Bob, as I explained more on why I didn't pursue MET.

But never the less, you're stuck with me now !

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:59 PM, said:

You are as lovable as the wart on my big toe, Ruggie....


My only point is that you and others are acting like the 2-3 years of crappy pay supercedes the long term benefits. The upside of a met career is certainly very positive as many have espoused in this thread.

A Question to all PRO METS

How much of the Math you went to college for is really used in your job ?

I mean do you really apply all this math you studied for in making a forecast ?
If so and be honest with yourself, when you get into the office to start your day and when it's time to go home from you shift or office, How much Math application do you use during that 8 or 10 hour day.

Ruggie

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 01:48 PM, said:

Thanks for the clarification. I took a look at Pjush Kundu's (sic?) GFD book this past semester and the topic looked very intriguing. From what I've heard, tensors are important in GFD. I know that they teach tensors at the beginning of the course at PSU, but I think I am going to try to take a math class on them before I take the GFD class. I'm meeting with my math advisor sometime next month -- hopefully we can come up with a plan for the best method of preparation.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:13 PM, said:

Fair question.

Although I use some arithmetic and algebra and statistics depending on what tasks I have on hand and what programs I am using, I can tell you that I don't use all that math I used in dynamics classes.

But... but but but, and this is a big BUT, I have found that the math has helped me enormously in understanding how the atmosphere behaves and how the models work. I wouldn't trade all the math that I have done towards my masters in this field for anything else, because it helped me develop an intuition about how the atmosphere and climate works physically. I also am able to understand how the models try to interpret what is going on as well as the production of their forecasts.

You may understand the basics of how the atmosphere works and how to forecast using "rules of thumbs", but without the math, you may be hard pressed to explain the hows and whys things happen the way they do. I'm not saying you have to get a masters in order to do that, but a bachelors in a good met program should give you that knowledge as well.

Mr Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 02:09 PM, said:

I really do encourage those young guys and gals who want it as a Career.

To Go for it !!!

I also look back and kick myself in the arse sometimes, as do my friends and family. Why didn't you do it, I guess they see the passion and so called talent I have in weather.
Even though I have Hammer Call busts "once in a while" !!!

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 01:51 PM, said:

That's where I think our biggest difference in viewpoints comes. To me, it's just not equal in many cases. It does go both ways, though -- sometimes the circumstances are better elsewhere, othertimes they are better where you are. But yeah, I agree with the statement that all else being equal, someone who goes elsewhere is probably going to be viewed a little more favorably than one who doesn't go elsewhere.

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 01:14 PM, said:

My first graduate level dynamics class used Kundu and tensors were extremely important the entire class. I don't use tensor notation that much, but I'm glad now I understand them.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 11:13 AM, said:

Its good to have a basic understanding of how the atmosphere moves etc, and for that the math is useful.

That said, I don't think I've used any of the math I learned in college since I graduated

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 02:17 PM, said:

Good answer and thanks !

I'm sure it has to be applied, and probably more depending on the branch one is in. Such as a general forecaster for the NWS, Vs. A Research MET in the Physics of the atmosphere, such as modeling input and data calculations, etc.

IMO, A forecaster wouldn't need or use as much Math vs a Researcher or one who is putting formulas into modeling or studying Model development.

Ruggie

Teaching meteorology or atmospheric science without significant amounts of math would be a complete sellout to the science and a terrible trend to start. I personally use math everyday, in actual calculations or in that I must recognize large amounts of calculus to understand meteoroloical literature. Regardless, just because someone is a forecaster doesn't mean they shouldn't have a good understanding of meteorology,a large basis of which is based on calculus, some of which is rather advanced. Here is a good yet dated essay from Chuck Doswell on the subject: http://www.flame.org.../dosfuture.html

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 01:24 PM, said:

Agreed. The math is VERY useful in the understanding of exactly how the atmosphere works, so it does have value, even though no one in operational forecasting sits around solving differential equations to come up with their forecast lol.

meteorology is one of the worst degrees you can get if you want to make a lot of money

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 02:31 PM, said:

Well just by reading a little on Chucky boy Doswell's essay, I must say he sounds like a Prick and Arrogant as hell ! Sounds like he knocks down the little guy or forecasters in military and course study, but pounds his chest to the educated.

The guy could do every calculation in the book and HE Will BUST at some point or many points !!!

The weather will always win and beat you no matter how much math, Science, and reasonings are calculated in the equation !

Ruggie

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 01:42 PM, said:

100% false if you prove yourself and are willing to relocate. You can actually live very comfortably.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

You completely missed the point. Those who do not go through the math stuff will not have the level of understanding of how the atmosphere works compared to those who do. It's that simple.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:44 PM, said:

In HOT, HUMID, HURRICANE PRONED, AREAS TOO !!!

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:46 PM, said:

You are really clueless about the field aren't you lol.

There are many mets making VERY good money who are not in Houston.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:46 PM, said:

Problem is those geek einsteins who do well at Scientific math have no common sense or know how to forecast !

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

Some are even in Florida !

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:47 PM, said:

Well in some cases that is true. The math helps lay a more solid foundation than you'd get without it, but doesn't guarantee you will make a solid forecaster.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:44 PM, said:

The performance of the Euro the last 3 months makes meteorology job security more comfortable...and while we're at it, the NAM since February 2005.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:48 PM, said:

Beats being in New Jersey anyday.

ORH_wxman, on Jul 26 2007, 01:49 PM, said:

Ain't it the truth! But hey I don't mind the added job security.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:49 PM, said:

Well, Well, Well,

We'll just have to talk to GiGi, Gorse, and Eberwine about this Mr. Rebel boy !
Oh and JB too, fellow Jersey Boy !

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:51 PM, said:

LOL!

Seriously though, and this is not a slam on anyone from Jersey, but given the choice (now that I've been both places), I personally would rather be here in Houston than up there. To each his own though.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:54 PM, said:

Come on Brian your always welcome to come up here ! I'll put you out in my shed, out back where I keep all my hammers ! Watch out for splinters though ! Ouch

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:18 PM, said:

Honestly, had you had the onus of forecasting professionally...you would have learned real quick where the hammer would go if you brought it down at the wrong time...

Mr Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 02:56 PM, said:

Bob, I always redeem myself !!!

Watch out Cuzzz !

CHEERS

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:44 PM, said:

i'm completely thrilled about having to possibly move thousands of miles away from my family and friends for a decent job while my friends with other degrees get to stay where they want while making more money than me

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 02:03 PM, said:

Again, it's the moving that turns most people off. I fully understand that. It isn't for everybody. The money can be much better than you think though.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

That was a cheap shot. What's with all the generalizations? Realize that "meteorology" is broken up into many different areas; some are much more "academic" with air quality, etc., while others deal with NWP and thus the more exposed branch of forecasting.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 03:03 PM, said:

As recent as 6 months ago, I felt that way. But now, I am looking/visiting potential places that I may like, so if I get a job there, I'll make the move and wouldn't mind it.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

1) I guess you have no idea who Chuck Doswell is and how important he was and still is in the areas of improving communication between forecasters and others in the field. Yes, he has a Ph.D and he spent much of his career trying to improve operational forecasting.

2) You seem to have come away with the idea that Chuck doesn't think that he (or other people with degrees) can bust on forecasts. I doubt that's true.

3) Your attitude seems to be that because "The weather will always win and beat you no matter how much math, science, and reasonings are calculated in the equation" that having little or no math, science, and reasonings are the way to go. I personally think that's ridiculous.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 03:18 PM, said:

I actually agree with Ruggie, somewhat....Mr Doswell comes off as extremely arrogant...I understand his points and actually agree with some of them, but he seems not tolerant of those he finds beneath his intellectual level.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 03:03 PM, said:

I had no idea you were such a momma's boy....

RiemannSun, on Jul 26 2007, 03:09 PM, said:

BullCrap !!!

If you can read I already said that about different branches in the field !

What's really cheap and Unfair, is for people who have a talent and knowledge of forecasting, but get no recognition because people like you and some others will say "One must be College educated to forecast or understand weather" ! So a Non Pro Met, like me busts a forecast here and there. But no offense but if a Pro Met Busts on a Call or Two, Well it Usually get's dismissed or forgot about real quick.

Now they're really the "CHEAP SHOTS" IMO !

I DO RESPECT ALL PROMETS: But sometimes they are favored and dismissed from busted calls, where someone like me get trashed for a bad call or two. I know I've made some really good calls as have PRO METS ! It just chaps my ass sometimes !

winterymix, on Jul 25 2007, 11:27 AM, said:

exactly.

Mr Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 02:24 PM, said:

At least you have the ability to express that without calling one of the greatest and most important meteorologists of the last 25 years names. Doswell is controversial, mainly because of his reputation as being abrasive as opposed to arrogant, but I understand what you're saying about the tone of the essay, though I think his points are right on.

Mr Bob, on Jul 26 2007, 03:26 PM, said:

whiteoutwx1796, on Jul 26 2007, 03:28 PM, said:

If you really love meteorology and have the ability to excel in the math and sciences that you must learn in HS and college, why not get paid for doing it?

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 11:42 AM, said:

Don't mind Forky, everyone. He's just chronically depressed

MonsonWeather, on Jul 26 2007, 03:31 PM, said:

Becauase you can make alot more, sooner, in an area you want to live, and still partake in meteorology and enjoy a passion for its associated sciences. That's what happened to me, and I'm 100% glad I didn't finish my year and a half, racking up student loans
- eventually going into the field. Of course, everyone is different.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 03:31 PM, said:

If you lived here in the Delaware Valley a PRICK is a word learned around 6 or 7 years old. We keep calling people that until we Die(If deserved) ! So deal with it. No need saying I sound like a 12 year old because I offended your Super Hero !

He degraded the hobbiest, Military, and Non degreed people who ALSO do a great job in forecasting the weather ! That in my books is really IGNORANT ! SNOOTY and a "MY crap doesn't strink attitude" !

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 11:49 AM, said:

I take offense to that!

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 11:51 AM, said:

Don't talk to Gorse... he'd rather be in ROC

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

Oct through April, Houston has some of the nicest weather in the united states.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 03:38 PM, said:

Ray, don't sweat it, Brian has been drinking again today !!

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 12:03 PM, said:

Moving is hard, sure. But in the end, I think you turn out a better person from the experience... both of living elsewhere, and the stress of being away from the loved ones. If nothing else, you learn to appreciate them more!

BIrving, on Jul 26 2007, 03:36 PM, said:

If one isn't willing to move and not make as much money at the start, than one possibly doesn't "really love" meteorology as someone who is willing to do so.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 02:41 PM, said:

Not only that, but if you're really a fan of extreme/interesting weather, leaving the Mid Atlantic coast shouldn't be all that difficult...

Just read the Chuck Doswell essay on forecasting, and I completely agree with what he says.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:37 PM, said:

No, he didn't, you're mistaking an educated opinion on the values of a meteorological education for degradation of an entire group of people. Doswell is not my superhero but is someone that most forecasters at least somewhat admire for all the operational work he's done. You didn't offend me, far from it. He was one of the first stormchasers (where most of his fame comes from), wrote a seminal paper on the structure of supercells, coined the term "HP" for heavy precipitation supercells, and was instrumental in making the researchers and forecasters involved at the early form of NSSL work together, and I'm sure that's just a small part of it.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:55 PM, said:

I'm good at two things: writing, and memorization. So as you can probably expect the logic-based math in college was not fun for me at all. I pretty much already surrendered all aspects of a social life up here at the #2 party school in the nation and I was still getting D's and even F's.

I enjoy the stuff I'm doing now, business matters and politics are other interests of mine and I can make a lot of money out of college doing it. My GPA is finally starting to come back to life and hopefully it'll be high enough when I finally graduate (probably after 5 years) to land a decent job. Starting salaries now for econ/business grads are well into the $40000's now and have good advancement potential. My other concern is being able to pay back student loans when I get out and being able to live comfortably back home in the NYC area. Before too much longer I'll be an I-95 guy again. Sorry Jamie. But I can still do this as a hobby and maybe even work in a related field in an energy company perhaps. And now I can actually afford to have a social life and get involved in extracurriculars.

Not to bash pro meteorologists at all, I have a ton of admiration for those guys for being able to trudge through college in this program.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 03:41 PM, said:

EXACTLY. I wasn't thrilled either. But I've found great friends down here, and I have become a better person. And you most certainly learn to appreciate your family more, even your annoying 17 year old brother.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 03:31 PM, said:

Maybe its the hat.

MN transplant, on Jul 26 2007, 03:54 PM, said:

he still wears it all the time...

Agreed 100 %. Even in TV... I'm constantly thinking about my synoptics-dynamics classes... including jet streak dynamics, QG-Omega equation, Q vectors among other things. Not being able to understand how they're derived... there is no way you can truly understand how they work.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 02:46 PM, said:

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 04:02 PM, said:

I can read well and if you read in between the lines, He does come off a bit snooty ! He has valid and good points, no doubt and I don't disagree with some of his thoughts ! I'm not acting like a 12 year old by voicing my opinion, just because I said Prick.

As I said I have respect for many PRO METS and this we all know. But for the guys like me who have a passion for what we love "Weather" and Forecasting, doesn't mean we also can't produce good to excellent forecast's by what knowledge and experience we have. My point is: There's people out there that can out forecast a College educated and degreed MET anyday of the week ! But they get No respect because they don't have the paper from a college. And there are plenty of Great PRO MET forecasts !!!

JB himself told me "Ruggie, you're no different than me, and I admire your passion, talent, and forecasting abilities. Just hearing that made me feel appreciated for my efforts, but I KNOW JB is Great at what he does and has much more knowledge and education in MET than me. Just by him telling me that, I respect and appreciate HIM even more.

Bottom line is JB was saying Ruggie, I know you can forecast weather, just as good as anyone else. He was saying He wasn't any better than the next guy just because he has a degree in MET! He's just being Humble and Honest, that we are all equal and if we have a love for what we do, we can Be great at it, no matter what !

Ruggie

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:47 PM, said:

I wish I hadn't seen this. This is a gross overgeneralization.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 12:13 PM, said:

I use math all the time. As some of you may know, I have a DEEP distrust with just following models blindly, so I pick certain locations and based on the raw data, test out the results via the math I learn in college. What can I say, I'm a perfectionist. It was REALLY HARD to learn at first, but as the years have gone on, it's become like second nature, which I admit is a little scarry.

DVDweather, on Jul 26 2007, 02:39 PM, said:

I liked your pic of Riker better...

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 01:03 PM, said:

That's the spirit! lol

Well, ok, but this:

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

is a lot different answer than this:

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 04:19 PM, said:

The first one still being a rather dumb post. But fair enough, I understand what your point of view is.

AtticaFanatica, on Jul 26 2007, 01:18 PM, said:

I generally agree with you. Doswell is a really gifted scientist, but from personal encounters, he does come off a bit stuck up and snobbish. However, even with that, he's given a lot to this field.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 05:58 PM, said:

Yeah, we'll see how it goes. I may change it again, but it probably won't be back to Riker, at least for now.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 01:28 PM, said:

Come on man, lets get back to a little bit of reality. If I bust, God knows I hear about it on this board. Remember if DT busted on a storm? How about the hounded of all time, JB? We PRO METS get pounded on all the time for a bad call, and I can't even imagine if you happen to be on TV.

MonsonWeather, on Jul 26 2007, 01:44 PM, said:

That isn't exactly fair to say though. Everyone is different. I would never question anyones passion here for meteorology. Sometimes having to move all over the country to chase that dream isn't possible. Sometime you have other responsibilities like family ties. Making the decission to want to stay in the Northeast rather than run all over the Plains does not mean that person is less interested in the science of meteorology.

RUGGIE WEATHER, on Jul 26 2007, 02:13 PM, said:

Ruggie, I have not used the math directly since I graduated.

As far as Mr. Doswell I have always been impressed by the contributions he has made to the field, but that article makes me think I should judge him by his work not his personality.

If you want a Met degree that doesn't involve math why don't you just get a Mississippi State degree?

MonsonWeather, on Jul 26 2007, 03:44 PM, said:

True but only some instances, and maybe your own lifestyle. How about having a family and a life? (i.e. children, mortgage/rent, etc)....not everyone entering a college/equiv facility is 18 and has their mom and dad paying for everything or fully endorsed ( scholarship, etc).

Keep in mind the big picture, not the box you or I and anyone live .... there are motivated, passionate people out there MORESO than actual mets that refuse to spend the thousands for school, or move their family to wherever it is....and also people in poor/poorer communities who don't have the funds or whatever else to undertake such a career decision.

The possibilites are endless out there, but to say someone doesn't truely love meteorology because they won't move their life is a bit much.

BIrving, on Jul 26 2007, 06:34 PM, said:

All valid points. (just for the record, my parents will definately not be paying my way through college, I'm not sure about scholarships, though)

BIrving, on Jul 26 2007, 03:34 PM, said:

When I graduated in 2003, I had $17,000 in loans to be paid off (the rest was some grants cuz my parents aren't well off and a combination of myself and my parent's money)... significant loan payments, for me, won't really begin until next year as I got on a "graduated plan" (one that assumed your salary would increase significantly as you moved ahead in your career after college).

I'm only 26 now and while, yes, I currently have no kids or spouse, I think I could begin to support them about now with my current salary (~$44,000 before taxes and not counting OT and night differential). Since I moved out here (after having pretty much NO savings from my years at AccuWeather), I've been thrifty enough to be saving a bit more than $1,000 a month... Not to mention that next year at this time my salary will be over $50,000...

So yeah, you put up with a few lackluster years right after college... but if you let yourself move (and I really do feel that the experience of moving far from home is GOOD for you in the long run, emotionally and mentally, even if it feels like a burden), and put your heart into it, then you can do well.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

Ray, I'm glad you made it to the next level from the Accu Weather days. But....in all honesty putting in a few years at a sweat shop then making 44k isn't exactly living the high life in my opinion. I'm not saying that 44k isn't a bad living, but I think when people get discouraged at our field they are discouraged because they don't want to be making less than 50k a few years after school. Especially with all the hard work that is required of us to make it through the major. Compared to what business majors (just to name one) go through we have a much tougher academic road. Is it worth it? Well for me it was because I loved what I was doing. Now I'm in a position that I would never have dreamed of when I was in college, but my tale is pretty rare in this field. I think most people that get a met degree either don't work in the field or make relatively low salaries (less than 60k a year is drelatively low compared to the rest of the educated work force).
So I think those choosing to get into this field should think extremely hard about keeping meteorology as a hobby and concentrating on a career path that pays better and perhaps shows more future growth. Then again you may be a weather nut like I was and wouldn't have settled for any other field. In the end though I enjoyed the weather more when it was a hobby.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

Good for you Ray ! Glad to hear you making it out there ! How's the A/C Running ?

You Gotta hate that heat man !

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 04:07 PM, said:

You missed the last line of paragraph 2...

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:07 PM, said:

This is along the lines what I was going to write. 44k with 4 years of intense, high end schooling and 4 years of experience in the field is not very appealing at all. Of course, NV living is probably alot cheaper than out this way, so it all balances out. Having the job of your dreams is of course "gravy" that no money can buy, anyway.

Making 63k 7 years ago @ 20-21 years-22 old with easy certificates (A+, net+, ms etc), trumped finishing school. No friends or family disagreed with that decision. But of course at this point, one can only wonder what could have been...or could still be!

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 04:07 PM, said:

A few more comments to what you wrote...

First, maybe its just a matter of perspective... next year (actually about 6 months from now), my salary will be on par with about as much as my dad has ever made in a year... (not exactly a rich family)

Second, really I got to wonder if our society is TOO materialistic. You can live quite comfortably out here on 44K... the same grade in a bigger city would be closer to 50K. Granted, if you already had a wife and kids, it'd be not quite so comfortable... but, still...

Maybe my satisfaction is more due to my background, and if you are a weather nut from an upper-middle class family, you'd have a lot more trouble adjusting to the first several years of your career...

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 06:21 PM, said:

A lot of it is relative, as different folks can live very comfortably with different income levels. Me? I could live just fine off of less than most people with a wife and child seem to be able to. It just depends on the type of lifestyle you want to live.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 07:21 PM, said:

Ray, it really does depend on perspective. I grew up in Pennsylvania where 44k a year would have been good enough to live an ok life. My parents were middle class and while our household income was higher than that its not like we were living a lives of luxery.
I now live in CT which is significantly more expensive than anywhere else I have ever lived. 44k here would leave you struggling to pay rent and afford groceries, would be about equal to 17k at Accuweather.
Moving here has opened my eyes as to just how much money other people in other fields are making these days. Its not a pretty picture for meteorlogists.

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 07:27 PM, said:

Except for gambling, I live about as simple of a life as you can. I always believe in living below your means..

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:30 PM, said:

kindof OT from the thread... what part of CT do you live in?

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 06:30 PM, said:

You used to be a pretty optimistic guy regarding the job prospects for mets if I recall correctly. I was the pessimistic one. Seems we have switched roles some lol.

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 04:30 PM, said:

Perhaps. All I know is that I grew up with my mom, dad and 2 other siblings and my parents seemed to ALWAYS be struggling to pay bills... and right now I'm saving $ at a pleasant rate and am living comfortably doing a job I love. That's good enough for me

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:30 PM, said:

what should I do as a senior met. student?

if I was a freshman or sophomore, I'd have switched majors

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 06:31 PM, said:

Sounds like we have a similar philosophy. I don't choose to live a very extravagant lifestyle by any means, and therefore am doing very well financially because of this.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 04:35 PM, said:

Move

VAwxman, on Jul 26 2007, 07:33 PM, said:

LOL. I can't remember my thoughts at the time but maybe I was optimistic with you because I knew you were going to make it cause you had enough talent to make it.

I'm not totally down on the field, but if you don't have an incredible passion for the weather (I guess everyone on here does or they wouldn't be here) then its a really tough field. Plus, I think I'm seeing too many bodies and not enough good jobs in the field. If I was getting into it now I would be very concerned about future-high paying jobs. But listen its like everyone else already said, if you have the talent you'll eventually do well.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 07:35 PM, said:

Get your degree, see whats out there. Make decisions as they come. Or you could always start kissing up to Brian and see if he can give you the inside track on the opening he has.

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 06:50 PM, said:

LOL... I don't think forky digs the long range stuff, so that rules out the energy arena, but he has the talent to do well some way in this field if he is dedicated to it.

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:50 PM, said:

it's depressing

you can't even have normal aspirations after you graduate

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 07:53 PM, said:

I feel for you...what kind of job would you want when you get out?

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:58 PM, said:

whatever makes the most money

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 07:00 PM, said:

In that case, you should learn how to do the long range forecasting thing heh heh... or try to become the next Tom Skilling or something.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 05:00 PM, said:

Glad to see you're an average American (well, in MOST ways )

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:49 PM, said:

That is the way many people have painted the picture over the years. I have read how NOAA and NWS are going to be downsizing and merging local branches together in the future. Computers seems to do more now with forecasting then 20 years ago and need for humans is getting less.
As far as starting salaries, many engineers take the same classes and come out of a decent college with starting salaries these days of $40,000-$60,000 with very limited experiences.

A question:

Why is the starting pay so low these days for students out of college. I have never heard a good answer. Is it just the big employers setting the industry pay scale?

It seems once you pay your days for the government gigs, you make decent money with good benefits.

DarkStar, on Jul 26 2007, 05:25 PM, said:

Its always been low. The low starting salaries for mets isn't something that is new... back in the early 80s, new Accu employees were starting at ~10K, or so I've been told... Granted, that's the extreme, but I don't think it was a whole lot higher for people in other first-time met jobs.

I think the issue is this: Meteorology is special in that there are nutjobs out there who REALLY love it... and who really want to do it... enough so that there is an excess of them and thus, they can get paid less. Most other jobs are NOT like this...

So, its up to us nutjobs to struggle through the early years... only the nutjobs can make it in this field!

This thread is really making me want to switch majors. While I would love to forecast for a living, I feel that making $$$ is more important to me. Anyone have suggestions about careers that are well paying and have the slightest similarity to meteorology?

NJSnowYeti, on Jul 26 2007, 09:40 PM, said:

I have an older brother who majored in water resources enginering with a minor in meterology.
He currently has been doing medical device sales for a top company for a decent amount of time.
He never went into the field because of the pay aspect met or hydrology work.
My older brother does very well money wise. Top reps in his company do and some make 7 figures a year in salary in commission.
I know my brother makes more $ then most doctors and lawyers in a good year.
Almost all people know what goes into a meterology degree class wise, as long as you are not some strange weather geek and are normal the opportunites are endless for work with any degree.

NJSnowYeti, on Jul 26 2007, 06:40 PM, said:

It seems that the average NJ person, especially one from the middle to upper-middle class, even IF a big met lover, just can't deal w/ the lifestyle adjustment... they're already too wealthy

Maybe it should be a rule that anyone who's parents are making close to or in excess of 100K shouldn't become a met major

I think the funny thing is that my sub custodian job I currently have pays 22k a year. Its easy work too. Just clearn things and move desks..etc. I cant imagine how somebody with 4 years of college under their belt can make a similar wage. All I know about pay is that the TV mets here make a LOT of money. Thats what all of them have told me too, and that its not that hard to get a good job. Yes I have heard the first few years could be crummy but they are all making over 100k with just a few good years of experience. Is TV meteorology where the real money is at or is my area rare?

Tempest, on Jul 26 2007, 09:51 PM, said:

I don't know, but it seems to me that if you want to make money as a met, Government is the way to go. Especially NOAA or perhaps EPA.

Tempest, on Jul 26 2007, 09:51 PM, said:

Union jobs in Philadelphia typically start $21.95/hr
no degree needed, just be ready to work.

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 06:53 PM, said:

I'm sure that the highest single salaries are in TV.

That said, NOAA tends as a group to have generally high salaries, and the job security and benefits are second to none. I'd rather work for NOAA (which I do, so its all good )

I don't know many people right out of college who are making a lot of money. Meteorology is not the only field where pay may be lower than expected. I guess it's painful that the college level work is so much more intense than what many others face but I am guessing you become a meteorologist because it's what drives you.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 09:49 PM, said:

NJSnowYeti, on Jul 26 2007, 09:40 PM, said:

unless you are super rich, the more you make the more you will spend. Only difference is you will have more toys and a bigger house . Take me for example, I bought my house 11 years ago and even though we are making double the household income now than we were making back than our monthly savings have not changed. We spend more, have nicer cars, have 2 kids, upgrades to the house, built in pool and so on. So technically even though we make a lot more our extra cash each month stays the same. As RAy(famartin) said, most Americans are materialistic .


getting back to Famartin, don't let him get you down Ray. You are 26 making decent money and doing a job that you love. You will do fine. Know only if we can get you into Mt holly.

famartin, on Jul 26 2007, 06:56 PM, said:

That is true. It seems like TV mets get the money..but job security isnt very good especially if you are bad. lol The good mets seem to be able to go wherever they want. If their contract runs out they can always resign somewhere else in the city.

Generally, from what I've seen, TV mets actually make the least amount of money starting.

I had a few friends starting out in the 17,500-20,000 a year in small markets. However, the opportunity for advancement is large IF you're good. Al Roker for example making seven figures although he went to my school, and he isnt a meteorologist. He was a communications major who took a few met classes.

And like any business, unfortunately, its who you know not necessarily what you know.

I believe the starting salary at accuweather is currently 26,000/year.

-Nick

Tempest, on Jul 26 2007, 10:03 PM, said:

A meteorologist I met and talked to via his weather spotter group for WHDH-7 NBC in Boston (he's a member here), Todd Gross... for example. He worked there for 20 years and was the chief meteorologist. Currently that's market 7, so I'm sure he was making a pretty good salary. He was randomly fired in 06 because they wanted to "go in a different direction". Shows something about job security in the TV news market. The stations can do almost anything they want. He then moved here to Springield, a huge drop to market 109, as a fill in and then weekend meteorologist at the NBC station, and is now all the way out in Salt Lake City at their ABC station, Market 35. IMO, TV is a pretty tough/sketchy field to pursue.

march58, on Jul 26 2007, 07:07 PM, said:

He just started. In 2-3 years, he'll be 60-70k.

I've been out of the private sector for only 5 years and I make triple what I did then.

MEkster, on Jul 26 2007, 10:19 PM, said:

noel's 23 and he's getting job offers for 60k+

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 10:20 PM, said:

Maybe you should consider switching majors?

MEkster, on Jul 26 2007, 10:23 PM, said:

it's too late

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 10:24 PM, said:

You have about worked yourself up to a big wheel of cheddar....Are you buried in debt or something?

MonsonWeather, on Jul 26 2007, 07:16 PM, said:

Yep that covers it. I still want to go into TV because most good mets can always get a new job as your friend has. If not though noaa/nws sounds good too. What do you need to make it into noaa/nws these days anyway? Does he work at ksl? Thats my favorite station in slc because I have spend most my summers there but havent checked recently cause I am in the Portland area.

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 10:24 PM, said:

Hey, I'm 30 years old, moved a few times with my goals in mind, now I'm working as a forecaster in the Boston area
making 75k/yr doing something I absolutely love. That's the good life if you ask me.

All these people in this thread bitching and moaning about re-thinking met, etc. A bit of moving early on, hard work,
and goals in mind go a long way.

I originally thought that moving away from the area would be something that I didn't want to do...but it turned
out to be one of the best things I've ever done. Met some awesome people, made contacts, and learned
another climate where supercells run rampant! Loved it.

MEkster, on Jul 26 2007, 10:31 PM, said:

forkyfork, on Jul 26 2007, 10:24 PM, said:

NJ Science Teachers start at $40k/year.....

Yeah, suck it up, boys.

I'm making 11/hr in my internship... do you see me bitching and moaning about how little I'm making these days? NO. I snagged a 2nd job to help pay the bills, and keeping in touch with NOAA HR so I can collaborate with them whenever I apply for NOAA jobs. I have a masters, so it's only a matter of time (2 maybe 3 years) before I start making over 70-80k/yr. And even then, it's not like I'm going to buy a McMansion or anything like that.

You guys try living on 15k/yr in an expensive city like DC. Then you'll really understand what I've been through the past year and half

My advice to HS students on this board...

Just make sure you are really passionate about met before you decide to take it as a major in college. If you just "like it" and it feels
like more of a hobby, don't waste your time. You'll eventually regret it if you make it through a college met program then have to go out
and work weekends, holidays, nights, etc.

Tempest, on Jul 26 2007, 10:29 PM, said:

nope KTVX

MEkster, on Jul 26 2007, 09:31 PM, said:

The numbers being tossed out here for NWS are much more agreeable and I think most of us could easily be happy ending up in the 60-80k range after several years experience. However, with all the horror stories of well-qualified people (some even with their M.S.) trying to just get their foot in the door there, it's tough not to be very concerned on that front, regardless of how well you do in school and such. I think the fear some of us have is more the *potential* to stay in the "sweat shops" long-term if things don't work out as planned with NWS or other better opportunities, especially with talk of consolidation, etc.

I think you're lucky when you get a job in met. Even though the first few years can be extremely tight, most people have to go through that. It's hard to start out. From my graduating class in May 2007, no one has yet gotten hired. I don't know what the average wait time is for employment, so if anyone could shed some light on that, I would appreciate it. I sometimes worry about my friends out there trying to make it because a lot of us have become close friends and employment is difficult to come by. Maybe it is too early to expect employment from a graduation only a few months ago.

Personally, I'm going to be a Master's student next year and I'm very close to a research assistantship with all the funding and stipend mentioned earlier. Teaching meteorological concepts to underclassmen and learning from graduate students is a passion of mine, which is leading me to seriously consider a job as a professor somewhere down the road. I want to conduct research and teach.

I go to St. Louis University, a department which took some pretty hard losses recently, but is rebounding very well. It's a small program (out of 30-40 majors in my freshman class, only 5 made it through to the graduation in May) and I enjoy the fact that the entire faculty knows me and I can just have an open discussion with any of them at almost any time I want. (Also, it's cool I can talk with a guy whose Ph.D. advisor was Ted Fujita at Chicago.) It really comes down to how much effort you put into your education and how self-motivated you are to actually learn rather than pass some tests, then do the ole brain flush at semesters' end.

And math is very important from my perspective. Try making sense out of any dynamics text without extensive knowledge of calculus and diff eq. I'm not a math wiz, but I've gotten to the point where I can interpret physical meaning from a mathematical expression...in a qualitative sense at least. I still have a long way to go though.

Lots of great post recently here. You really, as everyone else has been saying, will have to move around. The only NWS WFO openings i see online right now are in Montana. I think moving around seems like a great thing in many ways (though I may change my mind as I get older, and can see why some wouldn't/can't because of family, etc.), one of which would be getting a lot of experiance with different areas and types of terrain. Right now I'm really locked on meteorology, but in the next few years of high school we'll see how I do in the harder math, and if my views change. I think a 30-40k starting salary isn't too bad at all, and the 60-80k range is quite comfortable, especially doing something you love. My parents each make around 60k each without college, but to get there they had to work where they did for each about 15-20 years. With meteorology you will A. be able to make that much quicker and B. be doing something you love. That's from what I've heard/read in this thread.

brettjrob, on Jul 26 2007, 10:44 PM, said:

I think these are legit concerns. Getting into the NWS isn't as easy as it used to be. However, the jobs will continue to open (perhaps even at a
better pace than in the past) due to a lot of expected retirements. A masters degree plus 1 to 3 years in the private sector should give you
a 95% chance of getting in as long as you are willing to go to a place like Elko (for example) to start.

Quote

I'm not worried about that at this point. I think those ideas have been on the wane.

if you want money go into the business field and make connections...
my acquaintance from work makes over 100,000 dollars a yr, and she is only 23yrs old.

MEkster, on Jul 26 2007, 10:23 PM, said:

good reason not to have met student tags.

Ian, on Jul 26 2007, 11:17 PM, said:

I just want a regular met tag, please.

Here are a few CURRENT college costs, for any perspective met students/most other perspective students.. though for some of the listings the cost is for the campus that has the meteorology program. All of the costs include OUT OF STATE tuition and room and board. Some include book costs, travel expenses, etc... whatever was listed on their sites. These are the latest costs as of either the 2006-07 or 2007-08 year. All include on campus living. Sorry, they are mostly focused on the NE/E since I was looking mainly for myself. They are in order from lowest to highest cost. These are not all precise amounts, and I used the approximate average for the ones that had different plans for room and board, and such. Of course, the 4 year amounts will surely change due to rising costs. Again, just approximated amounts, considering no finantial aid/scholarships. Just for reference...

SUNY Oswego-----------------------------------------$18,960 per year-------------------------------------$75,840 for 4 yars
Kean University---------------------------------------$21,950 per year-------------------------------------$87,800 for 4 years
Oklahoma University---------------------------------$21,961 per year-------------------------------------$87,844 for 4 years
Millersville University-------------------------------- $23,899 per year-------------------------------------$95,596 for 4 years
SUNY Albany------------------------------------------$24,060 per year-------------------------------------$96,240 for 4 years
Lyndon State------------------------------------------$24,093 per year-------------------------------------$96,372 for 4 years
Plymouth State----------------------------------------$24,399 per year-------------------------------------$97,596 for 4 years
UMass Lowell------------------------------------------$26,234 per year ($14,964 per year in state)---$104,936 for 4 years
Florida State University-------------------------------$26,353 per year-----------------------------------$105,412 for 4 years
Texas A&M---------------------------------------------$26,766 per year------------------------------------$107,064 for 4 years
Rutgers University-------------------------------------$27,505 per year------------------------------------$110,020 for 4 years
Ohio State University----------------------------------$27,798 per year------------------------------------$111,192 for 4 years
Penn State----------------------------------------------$33,981 per year------------------------------------$135,924 for 4 years
Cornell University------------------------------------~$40,000 per year------------------------------------$188,400 for 4 years

To add on to what a few have said here you really do have to be passionate. I've seen it around me my half year at LSC. A few people who I knew that graduated with a degree in met told me about how it is and that you need to be real passionate. I was told when they came in over 60 people were in the met program only like 8 graduated with met.
They told me you basically devote your college life to it, especially math. They would be up all night.
Math is the #1 killer in met.

MonsonWeather, on Jul 27 2007, 01:43 AM, said:

NorEaster27, on Jul 27 2007, 02:14 AM, said:

, Great school, good luck!

In state tuition is cheaper than that, senior year coming up!

MonsonWeather, on Jul 27 2007, 01:43 AM, said:

You forgot FSU.

http://www.met.fsu.edu/
http://www.fsu.edu/students/prospective/un...nces/costs.html

Florida State University--------------------------------$26,353 per year----------------------------------$105,412 for 4 years

Terpeast, on Jul 26 2007, 08:53 PM, said:

No. The highest salaries can be earned in the energy arena. Outside of being a TV met in the really big TV markets, or being very high up in NOAA with lots of years under your belt, this is where the potential to make the most money lies in meteorology.

VAwxman, on Jul 27 2007, 04:06 AM, said:

like how much? most lead forecasters in the nws make betweem 80k and 110k. how much does mr. bob make?