4 ms·

Or he did some good work in the past and they have him the benefit of the doubt. 462k/3 is 154k/yr. That's 1-2 scientists.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
willis936 6y ago
Scientists make 80k/yr. For reference: https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/scientist-salary-SRCH_KO0,9.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/scientist-salary-SRCH_KO0...
- sandworm101 6y ago
  Yes, that is their salary but that isn't their total "cost". From the navy's budget perspective people cost much more than their actual salary (benefits, admin cost etc). Example. I work in the military. I am paid a salary. But, as a government employee I must take certain online courses (anti-bullying, sexual harassment, workplace safety). These are from another department but are budgeted as if they are from an outside organization. When I take the class, at no cost to me, the fee for that class moves from one pile of money (my unit's training budget) to another (the unit offering the course). Such expenses, even though internal to the larger organization, are budgeted by individual units. They are a cost associated with my employment but are not salary, tax, benefits or anything else employees might see on their paychecks. Such costs are real and must be anticipated whenever you hire people.
  - willis936 6y ago
    So the 462k labeled as “salaries” includes items that should be in the “equipment” section of the “cost” breakdown? Afaik “salary” is the total cost of employing. Cash is part of the salary, but so are benefits.
    - learc83 6y ago
      “Salary” numbers almost never include benefits like health plans and pension contributions, and they definitely don’t include things like unemployment insurance payments, and payroll taxes. I have never seen salary used as the total cost of an employee.
      - newen 6y ago
        It's actually marked as "labor" or "for salaries". These terms should include benefits and overhead.
        learc83 6y ago
        Right that's the point--there's a mismatch. The number in the original article likely includes benefits and overhead. The person I'm replying to is posting numbers from glassdoor and other places that most likely don't.
  - willyt 6y ago
    In business its called an overhead ratio. The total cost of employing someone, giving them a desk and buying them equipment, heating the space they work in, paying other employment related costs like a HR department, payroll etc. In my industry it’s typically between 2 and 2.5 times the gross salary of an employee.
- dlivingston 6y ago
  Take that with a grain of salt. At the US national labs (Sandia, Los Alamos, PNNL, ...), ~$70k is what a postdoc makes. A Scientist I starts at ~$120k.
  - willis936 6y ago
    National labs are a tiny (and highly sought after) sliver. In my experience of rummaging through public wage records, I have never seen a staff scientist at state run university outside of the $60k-$80k range.
    - metaphor 6y ago
      National labs are indeed above the DoD average, but NAWCAD isn't a state-run university either. High probability this clown was compensated in a pay band[1] that spans the equivalent of GS-12/13 for the locality[2]. [1] https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2010-22172/p-169 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2010-22172/p-169 [2] https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/21Tables/html/DCB.aspx https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries...
      - clemchem 6y ago
        Yeah, he's probably paid around 140k. (Given his age [0], and knowing that first year scientists at similar places start at GS-13, I'm going to guess he's at a GS-14 equivalent with DC area locality pay.) This, plus your internal grant money not only covers your salary but overhead, means a 140k person costs 300k or more. Federal scientists are typically paid through a few projects that total to 100%, so I doubt all of the 462k from the article went to paying him, but probably a large chunk of that did. [0] PhD in 1999?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- cossatot 6y ago
  Federal scientists are on the General Schedule payscale. As mentioned in another comment, they start out at about a GS-12 for PhD-level positions and move up to GS-15 from there (and then a small number of highly influential scientists can become 'super scientists' at the GS-16 level, and a very select few, i.e. Fauci, are on RF rather than GS scales). Then there is a locality adjustment. This is the table with the DC locality adjustment: https://www.fedweek.com/pay-tables/2021-gs-pay-table-washington-baltimore-arlington-dc-md-va-wv-pa/ https://www.fedweek.com/pay-tables/2021-gs-pay-table-washing... The rates are pretty similar to professor salaries at research universities; staff scientists at universities are often subordinate or soft-money positions.
  - 0xffff2 6y ago
    There's no such thing as "GS-16 level" anymore (not since the 70s according to Wikipedia). Beyond GS-15, management moves into the Senior Executive Service or "ES scale". On the technical side, there is a Senior Technical or "ST" track. I don't know how DoD does things, but in my agency the center director is the only ES at the field center level (presumably there are lots more ES types at HQ). We have quite a few STs, basically one the top scientist in each research area is an ST.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

willis936 6y ago

Scientists make 80k/yr. For reference: https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/scientist-salary-SRCH_KO0,9.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/scientist-salary-SRCH_KO0...

sandworm101 6y ago
Yes, that is their salary but that isn't their total "cost". From the navy's budget perspective people cost much more than their actual salary (benefits, admin cost etc). Example. I work in the military. I am paid a salary. But, as a government employee I must take certain online courses (anti-bullying, sexual harassment, workplace safety). These are from another department but are budgeted as if they are from an outside organization. When I take the class, at no cost to me, the fee for that class moves from one pile of money (my unit's training budget) to another (the unit offering the course). Such expenses, even though internal to the larger organization, are budgeted by individual units. They are a cost associated with my employment but are not salary, tax, benefits or anything else employees might see on their paychecks. Such costs are real and must be anticipated whenever you hire people.
- willis936 6y ago
  So the 462k labeled as “salaries” includes items that should be in the “equipment” section of the “cost” breakdown? Afaik “salary” is the total cost of employing. Cash is part of the salary, but so are benefits.
  - learc83 6y ago
    “Salary” numbers almost never include benefits like health plans and pension contributions, and they definitely don’t include things like unemployment insurance payments, and payroll taxes. I have never seen salary used as the total cost of an employee.
    - newen 6y ago
      It's actually marked as "labor" or "for salaries". These terms should include benefits and overhead.
      - learc83 6y ago
        Right that's the point--there's a mismatch. The number in the original article likely includes benefits and overhead. The person I'm replying to is posting numbers from glassdoor and other places that most likely don't.
- willyt 6y ago
  In business its called an overhead ratio. The total cost of employing someone, giving them a desk and buying them equipment, heating the space they work in, paying other employment related costs like a HR department, payroll etc. In my industry it’s typically between 2 and 2.5 times the gross salary of an employee.
dlivingston 6y ago
Take that with a grain of salt. At the US national labs (Sandia, Los Alamos, PNNL, ...), ~$70k is what a postdoc makes. A Scientist I starts at ~$120k.
- willis936 6y ago
  National labs are a tiny (and highly sought after) sliver. In my experience of rummaging through public wage records, I have never seen a staff scientist at state run university outside of the $60k-$80k range.
  - metaphor 6y ago
    National labs are indeed above the DoD average, but NAWCAD isn't a state-run university either. High probability this clown was compensated in a pay band[1] that spans the equivalent of GS-12/13 for the locality[2]. [1] https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2010-22172/p-169 https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2010-22172/p-169 [2] https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/21Tables/html/DCB.aspx https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries...
    - clemchem 6y ago
      Yeah, he's probably paid around 140k. (Given his age [0], and knowing that first year scientists at similar places start at GS-13, I'm going to guess he's at a GS-14 equivalent with DC area locality pay.) This, plus your internal grant money not only covers your salary but overhead, means a 140k person costs 300k or more. Federal scientists are typically paid through a few projects that total to 100%, so I doubt all of the 462k from the article went to paying him, but probably a large chunk of that did. [0] PhD in 1999?
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
cossatot 6y ago
Federal scientists are on the General Schedule payscale. As mentioned in another comment, they start out at about a GS-12 for PhD-level positions and move up to GS-15 from there (and then a small number of highly influential scientists can become 'super scientists' at the GS-16 level, and a very select few, i.e. Fauci, are on RF rather than GS scales). Then there is a locality adjustment. This is the table with the DC locality adjustment: https://www.fedweek.com/pay-tables/2021-gs-pay-table-washington-baltimore-arlington-dc-md-va-wv-pa/ https://www.fedweek.com/pay-tables/2021-gs-pay-table-washing... The rates are pretty similar to professor salaries at research universities; staff scientists at universities are often subordinate or soft-money positions.
- 0xffff2 6y ago
  There's no such thing as "GS-16 level" anymore (not since the 70s according to Wikipedia). Beyond GS-15, management moves into the Senior Executive Service or "ES scale". On the technical side, there is a Senior Technical or "ST" track. I don't know how DoD does things, but in my agency the center director is the only ES at the field center level (presumably there are lots more ES types at HQ). We have quite a few STs, basically one the top scientist in each research area is an ST.